Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

ALAS: A Stateful Multi-LLM Agent Framework for Disruption-Aware Planning

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2505.12501 v1 pith:KZJPMAGS submitted 2025-05-18 cs.AI

classification cs.AI
keywords alasplanningagentagentscompensationdisruptionsframeworkllms
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Large language models (LLMs) excel at rapid generation of text and multimodal content, yet they falter on transaction-style planning that demands ACID-like guarantees and real-time disruption recovery. We present Adaptive LLM Agent System (ALAS), a framework that tackles four fundamental LLM deficits: (i) absence of self-verification, (ii) context erosion, (iii) next-token myopia, and (iv) lack of persistent state. ALAS decomposes each plan into role-specialized agents, equips them with automatic state tracking, and coordinates them through a lightweight protocol. When disruptions arise, agents apply history-aware local compensation, avoiding costly global replanning and containing cascade effects. On real-world, large-scale job-shop scheduling benchmarks, ALAS sets new best results for static sequential planning and excels in dynamic reactive scenarios with unexpected disruptions. These gains show that principled modularization plus targeted compensation can unlock scalable and resilient planning with LLMs.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. A Taxonomy of Cognitive Capability Gaps in Generative and Agentic AI

    cs.AI 2026-08 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    The paper organizes persistent AI limitations into a five-part taxonomy of cognitive capability gaps and proposes a conceptual ACIA architecture and cognition-centric metrics, none of which are validated.

Pith tools