Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Self-Resource Allocation in Multi-Agent LLM Systems

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 2504.02051 v2 pith:Z2DZ7YG2 submitted 2025-04-02 cs.MA cs.AIcs.CL

classification cs.MAcs.AIcs.CL
keywords agentsllmsallocationtasksassignmentcoordinationeffectivenessefficiency
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

With the development of LLMs as agents, there is a growing interest in connecting multiple agents into multi-agent systems to solve tasks concurrently, focusing on their role in task assignment and coordination. This paper explores how LLMs can effectively allocate computational tasks among multiple agents, considering factors such as cost, efficiency, and performance. In this work, we address key questions, including the effectiveness of LLMs as orchestrators and planners, comparing their effectiveness in task assignment and coordination. Our experiments demonstrate that LLMs can achieve high validity and accuracy in resource allocation tasks. We find that the planner method outperforms the orchestrator method in handling concurrent actions, resulting in improved efficiency and better utilization of agents. Additionally, we show that providing explicit information about worker capabilities enhances the allocation strategies of planners, particularly when dealing with suboptimal workers.

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. Multi-Agent LLMs Fail to Explore Each Other

    cs.MA 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.5 of 10

    Modern multi-agent LLM systems fail to explore peers effectively; explicit LinUCB-style peer selection (MACE) cuts regret and lifts task performance, with gains scaling in agent diversity.

Pith tools