Why Do Multi-Agent LLM Systems Fail?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2503.13657v2
• Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2025 18:37:24 GMT
• Title: Why Do Multi-Agent LLM Systems Fail?
• Authors: Mert Cemri, Melissa Z. Pan, Shuyi Yang, Lakshya A. Agrawal, Bhavya Chopra, Rishabh Tiwari, Kurt Keutzer, Aditya Parameswaran, Dan Klein, Kannan Ramchandran, Matei Zaharia, Joseph E. Gonzalez, Ion Stoica,
• Abstract summary: We present MAST (Multi-Agent System Failure taxonomy), the first empirically grounded taxonomy designed to understand MAS failures.<n>We analyze seven popular MAS frameworks across over 200 tasks, involving six expert human annotators.<n>We identify 14 unique failure modes, organized into 3 overarching categories, (i) specification issues, (ii) inter-agent misalignment, and (iii) task verification.
• Score: 91.39266556855513
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Despite growing enthusiasm for Multi-Agent LLM Systems (MAS), their performance gains on popular benchmarks often remain minimal compared with single-agent frameworks. This gap highlights the need to systematically analyze the challenges hindering MAS effectiveness. We present MAST (Multi-Agent System Failure Taxonomy), the first empirically grounded taxonomy designed to understand MAS failures. We analyze seven popular MAS frameworks across over 200 tasks, involving six expert human annotators. Through this process, we identify 14 unique failure modes, organized into 3 overarching categories, (i) specification issues, (ii) inter-agent misalignment, and (iii) task verification. MAST emerges iteratively from rigorous inter-annotator agreement studies, achieving a Cohen's Kappa score of 0.88. To support scalable evaluation, we develop a validated LLM-as-a-Judge pipeline integrated with MAST. We leverage two case studies to demonstrate MAST's practical utility in analyzing failures and guiding MAS development. Our findings reveal that identified failures require more complex solutions, highlighting a clear roadmap for future research. We open source our comprehensive dataset and LLM annotator to facilitate further development of MAS.

Related papers

• Which Agent Causes Task Failures and When? On Automated Failure Attribution of LLM Multi-Agent Systems [50.29939179830491]
  Failure attribution in LLM multi-agent systems remains underexplored and labor-intensive. We develop and evaluate three automated failure attribution methods, summarizing their corresponding pros and cons. The best method achieves 53.5% accuracy in identifying failure-responsible agents but only 14.2% in pinpointing failure steps.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-30T23:09:44Z)
• Grounded Chain-of-Thought for Multimodal Large Language Models [66.04061083611863]
  We propose a new learning task for multimodal large language models (MLLMs) called Grounded Chain-of-Thought (GCoT) GCoT is keen to helping MLLMs to recognize and ground the relevant visual cues step by step, thereby predicting the correct answer with grounding coordinates as the intuitive basis. To facilitate this task, we also carefully design and construct a dataset called multimodal grounded chain-of-thought (MM-GCoT) consisting of 24,022 GCoT examples for 5,033 images.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-17T04:07:47Z)
• VOILA: Evaluation of MLLMs For Perceptual Understanding and Analogical Reasoning [63.0285363282581]
  Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have become a powerful tool for integrating visual and textual information. We introduce VOILA, a benchmark designed to evaluate MLLMs' perceptual understanding and abstract relational reasoning. We reveal that current MLLMs struggle to comprehend inter-image relationships and exhibit limited capabilities in high-level relational reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-25T23:36:19Z)
• Investigating the Adaptive Robustness with Knowledge Conflicts in LLM-based Multi-Agent Systems [39.390472904456836]
  We design four comprehensive metrics to investigate robustness of multi-agent systems (MASs) We first analyze mild knowledge conflicts introduced by heterogeneous agents and find that they do not harm system robustness but instead improve collaborative decision-making. Finally, we conduct ablation studies on the knowledge conflict number, agent number, and interaction rounds, finding that the self-repairing capability of MASs has intrinsic limits.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-21T02:24:43Z)
• D-CIPHER: Dynamic Collaborative Intelligent Agents with Planning and Heterogeneous Execution for Enhanced Reasoning in Offensive Security [22.86304661035188]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have been used in cybersecurity in many ways.<n>Capture the Flag (CTF) challenges serve as benchmarks for assessing the automated task-planning abilities of LLM agents.<n>We introduce the D-CIPHER multi-agent LLM framework for collaborative CTF challenge solving.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-15T23:43:18Z)
• MASTER: A Multi-Agent System with LLM Specialized MCTS [11.780059513577848]
  Large Language Models (LLM) are increasingly being explored for problem-solving tasks. MCTS relies on extensive sampling simulations to approximate the true reward distribution. We present a novel framework that coordinates agent recruitment and communication through LLM specialized MCTS.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-24T08:01:11Z)
• MALT: Improving Reasoning with Multi-Agent LLM Training [66.9481561915524]
  MALT (Multi-Agent LLM Training) is a novel post-training strategy that divides the reasoning process into generation, verification, and refinement steps.<n>On MATH, GSM8K, and CSQA, MALT surpasses the same baseline LLM with a relative improvement of 15.66%, 7.42%, and 9.40% respectively.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-02T19:30:36Z)
• Enhancing Multi-Agent Consensus through Third-Party LLM Integration: Analyzing Uncertainty and Mitigating Hallucinations in Large Language Models [1.4582633500696451]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) still face challenges when dealing with complex reasoning tasks. This paper proposes a new method that integrates different LLMs to expand the knowledge boundary. Experiments on arithmetic datasets have validated the effectiveness of the method.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-25T08:42:33Z)
• ErrorRadar: Benchmarking Complex Mathematical Reasoning of Multimodal Large Language Models Via Error Detection [60.297079601066784]
  We introduce ErrorRadar, the first benchmark designed to assess MLLMs' capabilities in error detection. ErrorRadar evaluates two sub-tasks: error step identification and error categorization. It consists of 2,500 high-quality multimodal K-12 mathematical problems, collected from real-world student interactions. Results indicate significant challenges still remain, as GPT-4o with best performance is still around 10% behind human evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-06T14:59:09Z)
• Textualized Agent-Style Reasoning for Complex Tasks by Multiple Round LLM Generation [49.27250832754313]
  We present AgentCOT, a llm-based autonomous agent framework. At each step, AgentCOT selects an action and executes it to yield an intermediate result with supporting evidence. We introduce two new strategies to enhance the performance of AgentCOT.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-19T02:20:06Z)
• SUPER: Evaluating Agents on Setting Up and Executing Tasks from Research Repositories [55.161075901665946]
  Super aims to capture the realistic challenges faced by researchers working with Machine Learning (ML) and Natural Language Processing (NLP) research repositories. Our benchmark comprises three distinct problem sets: 45 end-to-end problems with annotated expert solutions, 152 sub problems derived from the expert set that focus on specific challenges, and 602 automatically generated problems for larger-scale development. We show that state-of-the-art approaches struggle to solve these problems with the best model (GPT-4o) solving only 16.3% of the end-to-end set, and 46.1% of the scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-11T17:37:48Z)
• Visual Reasoning and Multi-Agent Approach in Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs): Solving TSP and mTSP Combinatorial Challenges [5.934258790280767]
  Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) harness comprehensive knowledge spanning text, images, and audio to adeptly tackle complex problems. This study explores the ability of MLLMs in visually solving the Traveling Salesman Problem (TSP) and Multiple Traveling Salesman Problem (mTSP) We introduce a novel approach employing multiple specialized agents within the MLLM framework, each dedicated to optimizing solutions for these challenges.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-26T07:12:06Z)
• AutoDetect: Towards a Unified Framework for Automated Weakness Detection in Large Language Models [95.09157454599605]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are becoming increasingly powerful, but they still exhibit significant but subtle weaknesses.<n>Traditional benchmarking approaches cannot thoroughly pinpoint specific model deficiencies.<n>We introduce a unified framework, AutoDetect, to automatically expose weaknesses in LLMs across various tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-24T15:16:45Z)
• Smurfs: Leveraging Multiple Proficiency Agents with Context-Efficiency for Tool Planning [14.635361844362794]
  Smurfs' is a cutting-edge multi-agent framework designed to revolutionize the application of large language models. Smurfs can enhance the model's ability to solve complex tasks at no additional cost.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-09T17:49:04Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.