arxiv: 2501.06322 · v1 · submitted 2025-01-10 · 💻 cs.AI

Recognition: 1 theorem link

· Lean Theorem

Multi-Agent Collaboration Mechanisms: A Survey of LLMs

Khanh-Tung Tran , Dung Dao , Minh-Duong Nguyen , Quoc-Viet Pham , Barry O'Sullivan , Hoang D. Nguyen

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-13 15:51 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.AI

keywords multi-agent systemslarge language modelscollaboration mechanismssurveyframeworkcoordination protocolscollective intelligenceagentic AI

0 comments

The pith

A five-dimensional framework classifies collaboration in groups of LLM agents to guide future multi-agent designs.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper surveys how multiple large language models coordinate as agents to tackle tasks too complex for any single model. It introduces an extensible framework built around five dimensions—actors, types such as cooperation or competition, structures like centralized or peer-to-peer, strategies, and coordination protocols—to organize existing work. The survey reviews methodologies across domains including networks and question answering, then extracts lessons, open challenges, and directions toward collective artificial intelligence. A reader would care because this structure turns scattered examples into a map for designing reliable group systems instead of isolated models. The framework aims to make collaboration mechanisms legible and extensible rather than ad-hoc.

Core claim

The central claim is that LLM-based multi-agent systems are best understood and advanced by characterizing their collaboration mechanisms along the five dimensions of actors, types (cooperation, competition, or coopetition), structures (peer-to-peer, centralized, or distributed), strategies (role-based or model-based), and coordination protocols, providing a foundation for more intelligent collective solutions.

What carries the argument

The extensible five-dimensional framework that organizes collaboration mechanisms by actors, types, structures, strategies, and coordination protocols.

If this is right

Existing MAS applications in 5G/6G networks, Industry 5.0, question answering, and social settings can be systematically compared and improved using the shared dimensions.
Future designs can deliberately select or combine specific types, structures, and protocols instead of starting from scratch.
Open challenges identified in the survey become clearer targets once mapped onto the framework.
Progress toward artificial collective intelligence can be tracked by how well new mechanisms fit and extend the five dimensions.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The framework may highlight under-explored combinations, such as distributed structures with competitive types, that current LLM agents rarely attempt.
Standard evaluation benchmarks for multi-agent performance could be derived directly from the coordination-protocol and strategy dimensions.
The same dimensions might transfer to non-LLM agent systems, allowing cross-paradigm comparisons of collaboration.

Load-bearing premise

That these five dimensions are complete and non-overlapping enough to classify every existing and future LLM-based multi-agent collaboration mechanism.

What would settle it

An LLM-based multi-agent collaboration mechanism that cannot be placed into any combination of the five dimensions without forcing significant omissions or overlaps.

read the original abstract

With recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs), Agentic AI has become phenomenal in real-world applications, moving toward multiple LLM-based agents to perceive, learn, reason, and act collaboratively. These LLM-based Multi-Agent Systems (MASs) enable groups of intelligent agents to coordinate and solve complex tasks collectively at scale, transitioning from isolated models to collaboration-centric approaches. This work provides an extensive survey of the collaborative aspect of MASs and introduces an extensible framework to guide future research. Our framework characterizes collaboration mechanisms based on key dimensions: actors (agents involved), types (e.g., cooperation, competition, or coopetition), structures (e.g., peer-to-peer, centralized, or distributed), strategies (e.g., role-based or model-based), and coordination protocols. Through a review of existing methodologies, our findings serve as a foundation for demystifying and advancing LLM-based MASs toward more intelligent and collaborative solutions for complex, real-world use cases. In addition, various applications of MASs across diverse domains, including 5G/6G networks, Industry 5.0, question answering, and social and cultural settings, are also investigated, demonstrating their wider adoption and broader impacts. Finally, we identify key lessons learned, open challenges, and potential research directions of MASs towards artificial collective intelligence.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

A straightforward survey that organizes LLM multi-agent work around five dimensions but stays mostly descriptive.

read the letter

This paper surveys collaboration in LLM-based multi-agent systems and proposes a classification using actors, types, structures, strategies, and coordination protocols. It reviews methods, applications in networks and industry, and flags open challenges. The main contribution is pulling recent papers into one place with a simple organizing lens. That can help readers who are new to the area see the landscape without hunting through dozens of arXiv preprints. The applications section and the lessons-learned part are clear and practical. The framework itself draws directly from classic multi-agent systems ideas and applies them to LLMs, so it does not introduce a sharp conceptual shift. As a survey there are no new experiments or derivations to verify, which means its value hinges on coverage and whether the five dimensions actually separate the literature without too much overlap. The claim of extensibility is stated but not stress-tested against edge cases in the text. Readers looking for an entry point or a quick map of current work will get something from it. Those wanting original results or a tightly validated taxonomy will find less. It is worth sending for peer review because a cleaned-up version could serve as a reference point for the subfield, even if the novelty is modest.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. This paper surveys collaboration mechanisms in LLM-based multi-agent systems (MASs) and proposes an extensible framework for classifying them along five dimensions: actors (agents involved), types (e.g., cooperation, competition, coopetition), structures (e.g., peer-to-peer, centralized, distributed), strategies (e.g., role-based or model-based), and coordination protocols. It reviews existing methodologies, examines applications across domains such as 5G/6G networks, Industry 5.0, question answering, and social/cultural settings, and outlines lessons learned, open challenges, and future research directions toward artificial collective intelligence.

Significance. If the five-dimensional framework proves extensible and non-overlapping in practice, the survey could provide a valuable organizational tool for the rapidly expanding LLM-MAS literature and help standardize terminology for future work on collaborative agentic AI. The broad coverage of applications demonstrates relevance beyond core AI research.

major comments (1)

[Framework section] Framework section (around the description of the five dimensions): The central claim that these dimensions are sufficient and extensible to classify all existing and future LLM-based MAS collaboration mechanisms lacks a systematic mapping of the reviewed papers onto the dimensions. Without such a table or explicit coverage analysis, potential overlaps (e.g., between 'types' and 'strategies') or omissions cannot be assessed, weakening the framework's utility as a guiding contribution.

minor comments (2)

[Abstract] Abstract and introduction: The phrasing 'Our framework characterizes collaboration mechanisms based on key dimensions' could be clarified by explicitly stating whether the dimensions are intended to be orthogonal or if interactions between them are expected.
[Applications section] Applications section: Some domain-specific examples (e.g., 5G/6G) would benefit from brief pointers to the exact collaboration dimension(s) being illustrated in each cited work to strengthen the link back to the proposed framework.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback and positive recommendation for minor revision. We address the major comment below and outline the planned changes to the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Framework section] Framework section (around the description of the five dimensions): The central claim that these dimensions are sufficient and extensible to classify all existing and future LLM-based MAS collaboration mechanisms lacks a systematic mapping of the reviewed papers onto the dimensions. Without such a table or explicit coverage analysis, potential overlaps (e.g., between 'types' and 'strategies') or omissions cannot be assessed, weakening the framework's utility as a guiding contribution.

Authors: We agree that an explicit systematic mapping would strengthen the framework's presentation and allow readers to directly evaluate coverage, potential overlaps, and extensibility. While the five dimensions were synthesized from a thorough review of the surveyed literature, the original manuscript did not include a consolidated table mapping each paper to the dimensions. In the revised version, we will add a new table that classifies every reviewed work according to actors, types, structures, strategies, and coordination protocols. This table will also include a brief discussion of any observed overlaps (noting that types capture the interaction mode such as cooperation versus competition, while strategies describe implementation tactics such as role-based assignment) and demonstrate how the dimensions accommodate the reviewed mechanisms without major omissions. We believe this addition will directly address the concern and improve the framework's utility as a guiding contribution. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: survey framework is purely organizational

full rationale

This is a literature survey paper with no derivations, equations, predictions, or fitted parameters. The proposed five-dimension framework (actors, types, structures, strategies, coordination protocols) is introduced as a descriptive classification scheme synthesized from reviewed methodologies, not derived from internal definitions or self-citations. All claims rest on external citations to prior MAS and LLM work rather than reducing to the paper's own inputs by construction. The extensibility assertion is presented as a guiding contribution, not a theorem or empirical result requiring proof. No load-bearing step matches any enumerated circularity pattern.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper is a literature survey that reviews existing methodologies on LLM-based multi-agent systems and proposes a classification framework. No free parameters are fitted, no new axioms are introduced beyond standard multi-agent systems concepts, and no new entities are postulated.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5548 in / 1149 out tokens · 20756 ms · 2026-05-13T15:51:54.814279+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

IndisputableMonolith.Foundation.RealityFromDistinction reality_from_one_distinction unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

Our framework characterizes collaboration mechanisms based on key dimensions: actors (agents involved), types (e.g., cooperation, competition, or coopetition), structures (e.g., peer-to-peer, centralized, or distributed), strategies (e.g., role-based or model-based), and coordination protocols.

What do these tags mean?

matches: The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports: The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends: The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses: The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts: The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear: Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Forward citations

Cited by 34 Pith papers

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

Coding Agent Is Good As World Simulator
cs.AI 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

A multi-agent framework generates and refines executable physics simulation code from prompts to create world models that enforce physical constraints, claiming superior accuracy and fidelity over video-based alternatives.
Hierarchical Attacks for Multi-Modal Multi-Agent Reasoning
cs.AI 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

HAM³ achieves up to 78.3% attack success rate on the GQA benchmark by hierarchically attacking perception, communication, and reasoning layers in multi-modal multi-agent systems.
TADI: Tool-Augmented Drilling Intelligence via Agentic LLM Orchestration over Heterogeneous Wellsite Data
cs.AI 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0

TADI shows that domain-specialized tools orchestrated by an LLM over dual structured and semantic databases can convert heterogeneous wellsite data into evidence-grounded drilling intelligence, with tool design matter...
From Skills to Talent: Organising Heterogeneous Agents as a Real-World Company
cs.AI 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0

OMC framework turns multi-agent AI into self-organizing companies with Talents, Talent Market, and E²R search, achieving 84.67% success on PRDBench (15.48 points above prior art).
Learning to Interrupt in Language-based Multi-agent Communication
cs.CL 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0

HANDRAISER learns optimal interruption points in multi-agent LLM communication using estimated future reward and cost, achieving 32.2% lower communication cost with comparable or better task results across games, sche...
GraphBit: A Graph-based Agentic Framework for Non-Linear Agent Orchestration
cs.AI 2026-03 unverdicted novelty 7.0

GraphBit is a DAG-based engine-orchestrated framework for agentic LLMs that achieves 67.6% accuracy with zero hallucinations on GAIA benchmarks.
CHAL: Council of Hierarchical Agentic Language
cs.AI 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

CHAL is a multi-agent dialectic system that performs structured belief optimization over defeasible domains using Bayesian-inspired graph representations and configurable meta-cognitive value system hyperparameters.
Rollout Cards: A Reproducibility Standard for Agent Research
cs.AI 2026-05 conditional novelty 6.0

Rollout cards preserve complete agent rollout records and declare the reporting rules behind scores, enabling reproducible evaluation where changing only the rule can alter success rates by over 20 percentage points.
Conformity Generates Collective Misalignment in AI Agents Societies
physics.soc-ph 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

Populations of individually aligned AI agents reach stable misaligned states through conformity, with small adversarial agents able to trigger irreversible tipping points.
STAR: Failure-Aware Markovian Routing for Multi-Agent Spatiotemporal Reasoning
cs.AI 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

STAR combines expert nominal routes with trace-learned recovery transitions in a failure-typed routing matrix, improving multi-agent spatiotemporal reasoning over baselines especially on error-deviating queries.
A Versatile AI Agent for Rare Disease Diagnosis and Risk Gene Prioritization
cs.AI 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

Hygieia is a new AI agent system that integrates phenotypes, genetics, and records to achieve superior rare disease diagnosis and gene prioritization with confidence scores.
A Versatile AI Agent for Rare Disease Diagnosis and Risk Gene Prioritization
cs.AI 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

Hygieia is a router-based multi-modal AI system that outperforms physicians in rare disease diagnosis benchmarks and assists with real-world medical records.
Self-Adaptive Multi-Agent LLM-Based Security Pattern Selection for IoT Systems
cs.CR 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

ASPO combines multi-agent LLM proposals with deterministic enforcement in a MAPE-K loop to select conflict-free, resource-feasible security patterns for IoT, delivering 100% safety invariants and 21-23% tail latency/e...
Learning to Evolve: A Self-Improving Framework for Multi-Agent Systems via Textual Parameter Graph Optimization
cs.AI 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

TPGO represents multi-agent systems as graphs of textual parameters and applies group relative optimization to enable self-improvement from execution history.
Explicit Trait Inference for Multi-Agent Coordination
cs.AI 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

ETI lets LLM agents infer and track partners' psychological traits (warmth and competence) from histories, cutting payoff loss 45-77% in games and boosting performance 3-29% on MultiAgentBench versus CoT baselines.
AgentGate: A Lightweight Structured Routing Engine for the Internet of Agents
cs.AI 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

AgentGate decomposes routing into action decision and structural grounding stages, allowing small 3B-7B models to dispatch queries competitively on a curated benchmark after targeted fine-tuning.
Do Agent Societies Develop Intellectual Elites? The Hidden Power Laws of Collective Cognition in LLM Multi-Agent Systems
cs.MA 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

LLM agent societies develop power-law coordination cascades and intellectual elites through an integration bottleneck that grows with system size.
Agentic Business Process Management: A Research Manifesto
cs.AI 2026-03 unverdicted novelty 6.0

Agentic Business Process Management reframes BPM around autonomous agents that must exhibit framed autonomy, explainability, conversational actionability, and self-modification to keep their actions aligned with organ...
Security Considerations for Multi-agent Systems
cs.CR 2026-03 unverdicted novelty 6.0

No existing AI security framework covers a majority of the 193 identified multi-agent system threats in any category, with OWASP Agentic Security Initiative achieving the highest overall coverage at 65.3%.
Beyond Individual Intelligence: Surveying Collaboration, Failure Attribution, and Self-Evolution in LLM-based Multi-Agent Systems
cs.AI 2026-05 conditional novelty 5.0

The survey proposes the LIFE framework to unify fragmented research on collaboration, failure attribution, and self-evolution in LLM multi-agent systems into a progression toward self-organizing intelligence.
STAR: Failure-Aware Markovian Routing for Multi-Agent Spatiotemporal Reasoning
cs.AI 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

STAR is a failure-aware Markovian router that learns recovery transitions from both successful and unsuccessful execution traces to improve multi-agent performance on spatiotemporal benchmarks.
Insider Attacks in Multi-Agent LLM Consensus Systems
cs.MA 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

A malicious agent in multi-agent LLM consensus systems can be trained via a surrogate world model and RL to reduce consensus rates and prolong disagreement more effectively than direct prompt attacks.
When Agents Handle Secrets: A Survey of Confidential Computing for Agentic AI
cs.CR 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

A survey providing a taxonomy of TEE platforms, an agent-centric threat model, and open challenges for applying confidential computing to secure agentic AI systems.
Heterogeneous Scientific Foundation Model Collaboration
cs.AI 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

Eywa enables language-based agentic AI systems to collaborate with specialized scientific foundation models for improved performance on structured data tasks.
EvoAgent: An Evolvable Agent Framework with Skill Learning and Multi-Agent Delegation
cs.AI 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

EvoAgent is an evolvable LLM agent framework using structured skill learning, user-feedback loops, and hierarchical delegation that boosts GPT5.2 performance by about 28% in real-world trade scenarios under LLM-as-Jud...
High Volatility and Action Bias Distinguish LLMs from Humans in Group Coordination
cs.MA 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

LLMs exhibit higher volatility and excessive action switching than humans in group coordination, failing to stabilize or improve convergence across repeated games.
AIVV: Neuro-Symbolic LLM Agent-Integrated Verification and Validation for Trustworthy Autonomous Systems
cs.AI 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

AIVV deploys LLM agents in a council to semantically validate anomalies in time-series data against natural-language requirements, automating human-in-the-loop verification for autonomous systems.
When Agents Handle Secrets: A Survey of Confidential Computing for Agentic AI
cs.CR 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 4.0

A structured survey of confidential computing for agentic AI that catalogs TEE platforms, agent-specific threats, transferable defenses, and remaining gaps in end-to-end frameworks.
Reinforcement Learning for LLM-based Multi-Agent Systems through Orchestration Traces
cs.CL 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 4.0

This survey organizes RL for LLM multi-agent systems into reward families, credit units, and five orchestration sub-decisions, notes the absence of explicit stopping-decision training in its paper pool, and releases a...
Fair Agents: Balancing Multistakeholder Alignment in Multi-Agent Personalization Systems
cs.IR 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 4.0

The authors propose a conceptual framework integrating stakeholder-LLM alignment methods, social choice-based aggregation for collective decisions, and stakeholder-centric evaluations to achieve fair multi-agent perso...
Towards Multi-Agent Autonomous Reasoning in Hydrodynamics
cs.AI 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 4.0

A Layer Execution Graph multi-agent system for hydrodynamics achieves 93.6% factual precision and 100% pass rate on 37 queries while degrading gracefully under data loss.
Multi-Agent Systems: From Classical Paradigms to Large Foundation Model-Enabled Futures
cs.AI 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 4.0

A survey comparing classical multi-agent systems with large foundation model-enabled multi-agent systems, showing how the latter enables semantic-level collaboration and greater adaptability.
Agentic Microphysics: A Manifesto for Generative AI Safety
cs.CY 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 4.0

The authors introduce agentic microphysics and generative safety to link local agent interactions to population-level risks in agentic AI through a causally explicit framework.
Toward Self-Organizing Production Logistics in Circular Factories: A Multi-Agent Approach
eess.SY 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 4.0

A multi-agent architecture with embodied agents, shared semantic knowledge, and dynamic digital twins is proposed to support decentralized, resilient production logistics in circular factories.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

166 extracted references · 166 canonical work pages · cited by 31 Pith papers · 12 internal anchors

[1]

Azad Abad, Moin Nabi, and Alessandro Moschitti. 2017. Autonomous crowdsourcing through human-machine collaborative learning. In Proceedings of the 40th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. 873–876

work page 2017
[2]

Sahar Abdelnabi et al. 2024. Cooperation, Competition, and Maliciousness: LLM-Stakeholders Interactive Negotiation. In The Thirty-eight Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems Datasets and Benchmarks Track

work page 2024
[3]

Suhaib Abdurahman et al. 2024. Perils and opportunities in using large language models in psychological research. PNAS Nexus (Jul. 2024)

work page 2024
[4]

Josh Achiam et al. 2023. Gpt-4 technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.08774 (2023)

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023
[5]

Gati Aher et al. 2023. Using large language models to simulate multiple humans and replicate human subject studies. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning

work page 2023
[6]

Junhyeok Ahn and Luis Sentis. 2021. Nested mixture of experts: Cooperative and competitive learning of hybrid dynamical system. In Learning for Dynamics and Control . PMLR, 779–790

work page 2021
[7]

Canfer Akbulut et al. 2024. All Too Human? Mapping and Mitigating the Risk from Anthropomorphic AI. Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society 7 (Oct. 2024), 13–26

work page 2024
[8]

Anonymous. 2024. DOMAIN GENERALIZATION VIA PARETO OPTIMAL GRADIENT MATCHING. In Submitted to The Thirteenth International Conference on Learning Representations . under review

work page 2024
[9]

Anonymous. 2024. Federated Domain Generalization with Data-free On-server Gradient Matching. In Submitted to The Thirteenth International Conference on Learning Representations . under review

work page 2024
[10]

Gabriele Ansaldo. 2023. AgentSpeak: A Framework for Agent-Based Modeling with Integrated Large Language Models; Case Study: Analyzing Policy Interventions in Electric Vehicle Adoption . Master’s thesis. Northeastern University

work page 2023
[11]

Christopher A. Bail. 2024. Can Generative AI improve social science? Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 121, 21 (2024), e2314021121

work page 2024
[12]

Rafael Barbarroxa et al. 2024. Benchmarking AutoGen with different large language models. In 2024 IEEE Conference on Artificial Intelligence (CAI). IEEE, 263–264

work page 2024
[13]

Kallista Bonawitz et al. 2021. Federated Learning and Privacy: Building privacy-preserving systems for machine learning and data science on decentralized data. Queue (Nov. 2021)

work page 2021
[14]

Michele Braccini et al. 2024. Swarm Intelligence: A Novel and Unconventional Approach to Dance Choreography Creation

work page 2024
[15]

Weilin Cai et al. 2024. A Survey on Mixture of Experts. arXiv:2407.06204 [cs.LG]

work page arXiv 2024
[16]

Chengzhi Cao et al. 2024. Enhancing Human-AI Collaboration Through Logic-Guided Reasoning. In The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations

work page 2024
[17]

Alan Chan et al . 2023. Harms from Increasingly Agentic Algorithmic Systems. In Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (Chicago, IL, USA) (FAccT ’23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 651–666

work page 2023
[18]

Chi-Min Chan et al. 2024. ChatEval: Towards Better LLM-based Evaluators through Multi-Agent Debate. In The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations

work page 2024
[19]

Yupeng Chang et al. 2024. A survey on evaluation of large language models. ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology 15, 3 (2024), 1–45

work page 2024
[20]

Guangyao Chen et al . 2024. AutoAgents: A Framework for Automatic Agent Generation. In Proceedings of the Thirty-Third International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI-24 , Kate Larson (Ed.). International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence Organization, 22–30. Main Track

work page 2024
[21]

Huaben Chen, Wenkang Ji, Lufeng Xu, and Shiyu Zhao. 2023. Multi-Agent Consensus Seeking via Large Language Models. ArXiv abs/2310.20151 (2023)

work page arXiv 2023
[22]

Junzhe Chen et al. 2024. LLMArena: Assessing Capabilities of Large Language Models in Dynamic Multi-Agent Environments. In Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers). Association for Computational Linguistics, Bangkok, Thailand, 13055–13077

work page 2024
[23]

Pei Chen, Shuai Zhang, and Boran Han. 2024. CoMM: Collaborative Multi-Agent, Multi-Reasoning-Path Prompting for Complex Problem Solving. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: NAACL 2024 , Kevin Duh, Helena Gomez, and Steven Bethard (Eds.). ACL, Mexico City, Mexico, 1720–1738

work page 2024
[24]

Weize Chen et al. 2024. AgentVerse: Facilitating Multi-Agent Collaboration and Exploring Emergent Behaviors. In The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations . Multi-Agent Collaboration Mechanisms: A Survey of LLMs 31

work page 2024
[25]

Wei-Lin Chiang et al. 2024. Chatbot arena: An open platform for evaluating llms by human preference. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.04132 (2024)

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024
[26]

Vincent Conitzer and Caspar Oesterheld. 2024. Foundations of Cooperative AI. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence 37, 13 (Jul. 2024), 15359–15367

work page 2024
[27]

Crowley et al

James L. Crowley et al. 2023. A Hierarchical Framework for Collaborative Artificial Intelligence. IEEE Pervasive Computing 22, 1 (2023), 9–18. https://doi.org/10.1109/MPRV.2022.3208321

work page doi:10.1109/mprv.2022.3208321 2023
[28]

Florin Cuconasu et al. 2024. The power of noise: Redefining retrieval for rag systems. In Proceedings of the 47th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval . 719–729

work page 2024
[29]

Allan Dafoe et al. 2020. Open Problems in Cooperative AI. arXiv:2012.08630 [cs.AI]

work page arXiv 2020
[30]

Allan Dafoe et al. 2021. Cooperative AI: machines must learn to find common ground. Nature 593, 7857 (May 2021), 33–36

work page 2021
[31]

Gordon Dai et al. 2024. Artificial Leviathan: Exploring Social Evolution of LLM Agents Through the Lens of Hobbesian Social Contract Theory. arXiv:2406.14373 [cs.AI]

work page arXiv 2024
[32]

Mike D’Arcy et al. 2024. MARG: Multi-Agent Review Generation for Scientific Papers. arXiv:2401.04259 [cs.CL]

work page arXiv 2024
[33]

Ayushman Das et al. 2023. Enabling Synergistic Knowledge Sharing and Reasoning in Large Language Models with Collaborative Multi-Agents. In IEEE International Conference on Collaboration and Internet Computing

work page 2023
[34]

Tim Ruben Davidson et al . 2024. Evaluating Language Model Agency Through Negotiations. In The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations

work page 2024
[35]

Ameet Deshpande et al. 2023. Anthropomorphization of AI: Opportunities and Risks. arXiv:2305.14784 [cs.AI]

work page arXiv 2023
[36]

Danica Dillion et al. 2023. Can AI language models replace human participants? Trends in Cognitive Sciences 27, 7 (2023), 597–600

work page 2023
[37]

Mohammad Divband Soorati et al. 2022. From intelligent agents to trustworthy human-centred multiagent systems. AI Communications 35, 4 (2022), 443–457

work page 2022
[38]

Manqing Dong, Hao Huang, and Longbing Cao. 2024. Can LLMs Serve As Time Series Anomaly Detectors? arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.03475 (2024)

work page arXiv 2024
[39]

Yubo Dong et al. 2024. VillagerAgent: A Graph-Based Multi-Agent Framework for Coordinating Complex Task Dependencies in Minecraft. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2024 , Lun-Wei Ku, Andre Martins, and Vivek Srikumar (Eds.). Association for Computational Linguistics, Bangkok, Thailand, 16290–16314

work page 2024
[40]

Kanhere, and Raja Jurdak

Ali Dorri, Salil S. Kanhere, and Raja Jurdak. 2018. Multi-Agent Systems: A Survey.IEEE Access 6 (2018), 28573–28593

work page 2018
[41]

Yilun Du et al . 2023. Improving Factuality and Reasoning in Language Models through Multiagent Debate. arXiv:2305.14325 [cs.CL]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023
[42]

Lizhou Fan et al. 2024. A bibliometric review of large language models research from 2017 to 2023. ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology 15, 5 (2024), 1–25

work page 2024
[43]

Joel E Fischer et al. 2021. In-the-loop or on-the-loop? Interactional arrangements to support team coordination with a planning agent. Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience 33, 8 (2021), e4082

work page 2021
[44]

Adam Fourney et al. 2024. Magentic-One: A Generalist Multi-Agent System for Solving Complex Tasks . Technical Report MSR-TR-2024-47. Microsoft

work page 2024
[45]

Chris Frith and Uta Frith. 2005. Theory of mind. Current biology 15, 17 (2005), R644–R645

work page 2005
[46]

Chen Gao et al . 2024. Large language models empowered agent-based modeling and simulation: a survey and perspectives. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications 11, 1 (Sept. 2024)

work page 2024
[47]

Taicheng Guo et al. 2024. Large Language Model Based Multi-agents: A Survey of Progress and Challenges. In Proceedings of the Thirty-Third International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI-24 , Kate Larson (Ed.). International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence Organization, 8048–8057. Survey Track

work page 2024
[48]

Onder Gurcan. 2024. LLM-Augmented Agent-Based Modelling for Social Simulations: Challenges and Opportunities. arXiv:2405.06700 [physics.soc-ph]

work page arXiv 2024
[49]

Thilo Hagendorff, Sarah Fabi, and Michal Kosinski. 2023. Human-like intuitive behavior and reasoning biases emerged in large language models but disappeared in ChatGPT. Nature Computational Science 3, 10 (2023), 833–838

work page 2023
[50]

Shanshan Han et al. 2024. LLM Multi-Agent Systems: Challenges and Open Problems. arXiv:2402.03578 [cs.MA]

work page arXiv 2024
[51]

Kostas Hatalis et al. 2023. Memory Matters: The Need to Improve Long-Term Memory in LLM-Agents. In Proceedings of the AAAI Symposium Series , Vol. 2. 277–280

work page 2023
[52]

Junda He, Christoph Treude, and David Lo. 2024. LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems for Software Engineering: Vision and the Road Ahead. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.04834 (2024)

work page arXiv 2024
[53]

Shawn He et al. 2024. Norm Violation Detection in Multi-Agent Systems using Large Language Models: A Pilot Study. arXiv:2403.16517 [cs.MA]

work page arXiv 2024
[54]

Zhitao He et al. 2023. LEGO: A Multi-agent Collaborative Framework with Role-playing and Iterative Feedback for Causality Explanation Generation. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2023 , Houda Bouamor, Juan Pino, and Kalika Bali (Eds.). Association for Computational Linguistics, Singapore, 9142–9163. 32 Tran et al

work page 2023
[55]

Jordan Hoffmann et al. 2024. Training compute-optimal large language models. InProceedings of the 36th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (New Orleans, LA, USA) (NIPS ’22). Curran Associates Inc., Red Hook, NY, USA, Article 2176, 15 pages

work page 2024
[56]

Sirui Hong et al. 2024. MetaGPT: Meta Programming for A Multi-Agent Collaborative Framework. In The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations

work page 2024
[57]

Lei Huang et al. 2023. A survey on hallucination in large language models: Principles, taxonomy, challenges, and open questions. arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.05232 (2023)

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023
[58]

Xu Huang et al. 2024. Understanding the planning of LLM agents: A survey. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.02716 (2024)

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2024
[59]

Yoichi Ishibashi and Yoshimasa Nishimura. 2024. Self-Organized Agents: A LLM Multi-Agent Framework toward Ultra Large-Scale Code Generation and Optimization. arXiv:2404.02183 [cs.SE]

work page arXiv 2024
[60]

Ashraful Islam, Mohammed Eunus Ali, and Md Rizwan Parvez

Md. Ashraful Islam, Mohammed Eunus Ali, and Md Rizwan Parvez. 2024. MapCoder: Multi-Agent Code Generation for Competitive Problem Solving. InProceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics

work page 2024
[61]

Shankar Kumar Jeyakumar, Alaa Alameer Ahmad, and Adrian Garret Gabriel. 2024. Advancing Agentic Systems: Dynamic Task Decomposition, Tool Integration and Evaluation using Novel Metrics and Dataset. InNeurIPS 2024 Workshop on Open-World Agents

work page 2024
[62]

Divyansh Jhunjhunwala, Shiqiang Wang, and Gauri Joshi. 2023. FedExP: Speeding Up Federated Averaging via Extrapolation. In The Eleventh International Conference on Learning Representations

work page 2023
[63]

Zhenlan Ji et al. 2024. Testing and Understanding Erroneous Planning in LLM Agents through Synthesized User Inputs. arXiv:2404.17833 [cs.AI]

work page arXiv 2024
[64]

Dongfu Jiang, Xiang Ren, and Bill Yuchen Lin. 2023. LLM-Blender: Ensembling Large Language Models with Pairwise Ranking and Generative Fusion. In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics

work page 2023
[65]

Feibo Jiang et al. 2024. Large AI Model Empowered Multimodal Semantic Communications. IEEE Communications Magazine (2024), 1–7

work page 2024
[66]

Feibo Jiang et al. 2024. Large Language Model Enhanced Multi-Agent Systems for 6G Communications. IEEE Wireless Communications (2024), 1–8

work page 2024
[67]

Xue Jiang et al. 2024. Self-Planning Code Generation with Large Language Models. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 33, 7, Article 182 (Sept. 2024), 30 pages

work page 2024
[68]

Yogeswaranathan Kalyani and Rem Collier. 2024. The Role of Multi-Agents in Digital Twin Implementation: Short Survey. ACM Comput. Surv. 57, 3, Article 72 (Nov. 2024), 15 pages

work page 2024
[69]

Jared Kaplan et al. 2020. Scaling laws for neural language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2001.08361 (2020)

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020
[70]

Stefano Lambiase et al. 2024. Motivations, Challenges, Best Practices, and Benefits for Bots and Conversational Agents in Software Engineering: A Multivocal Literature Review. ACM Comput. Surv. 57, 4, Article 93 (Dec. 2024), 37 pages

work page 2024
[71]

Jan Marco Leimeister. 2010. Collective Intelligence. Business and Information Systems Engineering 2, 4 (June 2010), 245–248

work page 2010
[72]

Yaniv Leviathan, Matan Kalman, and Yossi Matias. 2023. Fast inference from transformers via speculative decoding. In International Conference on Machine Learning . PMLR, 19274–19286

work page 2023
[73]

Cheng Li et al . 2024. CulturePark: Boosting Cross-cultural Understanding in Large Language Models. arXiv:2405.15145 [cs.AI]

work page arXiv 2024
[74]

Guohao Li et al. 2023. CAMEL: Communicative Agents for ”Mind” Exploration of Large Language Model Society. In Thirty-seventh Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems

work page 2023
[75]

Huao Li et al. 2023. Theory of Mind for Multi-Agent Collaboration via Large Language Models. In Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing , Houda Bouamor, Juan Pino, and Kalika Bali (Eds.). Association for Computational Linguistics, Singapore, 180–192

work page 2023
[76]

Junyi Li et al. 2024. Pre-Trained Language Models for Text Generation: A Survey. ACM Comput. Surv. 56, 9, Article 230 (April 2024), 39 pages

work page 2024
[77]

Tian Liang et al. 2024. Encouraging Divergent Thinking in Large Language Models through Multi-Agent Debate. In Proceedings of the 2024 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing , Yaser Al-Onaizan, Mohit Bansal, and Yun-Nung Chen (Eds.). Association for Computational Linguistics, Miami, Florida, USA, 17889–17904

work page 2024
[78]

Qiang Liu et al. 2024. LLM Enhanced Reconfigurable Intelligent Surface for Energy-Efficient and Reliable 6G IoV. IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology (2024), 1–9

work page 2024
[79]

Ryan Liu et al . 2024. Large Language Models Assume People are More Rational than We Really are. arXiv:2406.17055 [cs.CL]

work page arXiv 2024
[80]

Xiao Liu et al. 2024. AgentBench: Evaluating LLMs as Agents. In The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations

work page 2024

Showing first 80 references.