Know the Ropes: A Heuristic Strategy for LLM-based Multi-Agent System Design

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.16979v1
• Date: Thu, 22 May 2025 17:52:33 GMT
• Title: Know the Ropes: A Heuristic Strategy for LLM-based Multi-Agent System Design
• Abstract summary: Know-The-Ropes is a framework that converts domain priors into an algorithmic blueprint hierarchy.<n>Three GPT-4o-mini agents raise accuracy from 3% zero-shot to 95% on size-5 instances after patching a single bottleneck agent.
• Score: 27.246783209927464
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Single-agent LLMs hit hard limits--finite context, role overload, and brittle domain transfer. Conventional multi-agent fixes soften those edges yet expose fresh pains: ill-posed decompositions, fuzzy contracts, and verification overhead that blunts the gains. We therefore present Know-The-Ropes (KtR), a framework that converts domain priors into an algorithmic blueprint hierarchy, in which tasks are recursively split into typed, controller-mediated subtasks, each solved zero-shot or with the lightest viable boost (e.g., chain-of-thought, micro-tune, self-check). Grounded in the No-Free-Lunch theorem, KtR trades the chase for a universal prompt for disciplined decomposition. On the Knapsack problem (3-8 items), three GPT-4o-mini agents raise accuracy from 3% zero-shot to 95% on size-5 instances after patching a single bottleneck agent. On the tougher Task-Assignment problem (6-15 jobs), a six-agent o3-mini blueprint hits 100% up to size 10 and 84% on sizes 13-15, versus 11% zero-shot. Algorithm-aware decomposition plus targeted augmentation thus turns modest models into reliable collaborators--no ever-larger monoliths required.

Related papers

• Right-Sizing LLM-Agent Decomposition in VAT Determination: A Pilot Controlled Sweep [0.3384279376065155]
  This pilot studies that choice on bounded cross-border VAT determination with reverse charge.<n>We hold the activity surface fixed (subtasks, tools, I/O schemas, validation checks, orchestrator, base model, and merge policy)<n>The program spans 4,400 runs: a 40-case, five-repeat main sweep, matched-token arms separating prompt-budget from agent-count effects, and three failure-injection arms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-24T15:40:15Z)
• TriAgent: Divergence-Aware Multi-Agent Committees for Cost-Efficient Financial Sentiment Analysis [0.9861185030860833]
  TriAgent is a multi-agent committee stratified by contextual granularity.<n>A three-way Divergence Index measures disagreement across granularities.<n>Code, lexicons, and the SCD are released.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-22T06:20:32Z)
• Unlocking Model Potentials Through Adaptive Multi-Agent Scaffolding for Efficient Issue Resolution [4.960870628748691]
  Inefficient context management can lead to rapid context degradation and context poisoning.<n>We propose icat-agent, a decentralized, multi-agent scaffolding that replaces shared context with synchronous, event-based message passing.<n>icat-agent consistently outperforms prominent baselines across all difficulty levels.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-24T07:48:05Z)
• Reward Hacking Benchmark: Measuring Exploits in LLM Agents with Tool Use [0.016201337438609787]
  Reinforcement learning (RL) trained language model agents with tool access are increasingly deployed in coding assistants, research tools, and autonomous systems.<n>We introduce the Reward Hacking Benchmark (RHB), a suite of multi-step tasks requiring sequential tool operations with naturalistic shortcut opportunities.<n>We evaluate 13 frontier models from OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, and DeepSeek.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-03T07:10:42Z)
• PlanFlip: Attacking Multi-Agent LLM Systems via Planning-Phase Prompt Injection [19.162716475205308]
  Multi-agent LLM systems increasingly rely on a Planner to decompose goals into sub-task sequences.<n>A single injection into the Planner's context achieves cascade amplification, corrupting all downstream sub-tasks simultaneously.<n>We introduce PlanFlip, a framework comprising four planning-phase prompt injection attacks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-30T07:22:06Z)
• Synthesizing the Kill Chain: A Zero-Shot Framework for Target Verification and Tactical Reasoning on the Edge [12.201060368447251]
  This paper introduces a hierarchical, zero-shot framework that cascades lightweight object detection with compact Vision-Language Models (VLMs)<n>We evaluate this pipeline on 55 high-fidelity synthetic videos from Battlefield 6 across three tasks: false-positive filtering (up to 100% accuracy), damage assessment (up to 97.5%), and fine-grained vehicle classification (55-90%)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-10T23:00:19Z)
• The Six Sigma Agent: Achieving Enterprise-Grade Reliability in LLM Systems Through Consensus-Driven Decomposed Execution [0.0]
  We introduce the Six Sigma Agent, a novel architecture that achieves enterprise-grade reliability through three synergistic components.<n>We demonstrate a 14,700x reliability improvement over single-agent execution while reducing costs by 80%.<n>Our work establishes that reliability in AI systems emerges from principled redundancy and consensus rather than model scaling alone.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-29T20:04:29Z)
• Beyond Max Tokens: Stealthy Resource Amplification via Tool Calling Chains in LLM Agents [31.789859492703016]
  The agent-tool communication loop is a critical attack surface in Large Language Model (LLM) agents.<n>Existing Denial-of-Service (DoS) attacks are ineffective for this new paradigm.<n>We introduce a stealthy, multi-turn economic DoS attack that operates at the tool layer under the guise of a correctly completed task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-16T02:47:45Z)
• Reinforcement Learning for Chain of Thought Compression with One-Domain-to-All Generalization [27.13234369037689]
  Chain-of-thought reasoning in large language models can trigger an "overthinking trap"<n>We propose mastery-gated, sample-level, soft reinforcement learning compression.<n>It penalizes long rollouts only when the model already solves the problem and has produced a shorter rollout.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-19T06:30:54Z)
• Towards a Science of Scaling Agent Systems [79.64446272302287]
  We formalize a definition for agent evaluation and characterize scaling laws as the interplay between agent quantity, coordination structure, modelic, and task properties.<n>We derive a predictive model using coordination metrics, that cross-validated R2=0, enabling prediction on unseen task domains.<n>We identify three effects: (1) a tool-coordination trade-off: under fixed computational budgets, tool-heavy tasks suffer disproportionately from multi-agent overhead, and (2) a capability saturation: coordination yields diminishing or negative returns once single-agent baselines exceed 45%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-09T06:52:21Z)
• More Agents Helps but Adversarial Robustness Gap Persists [10.507110902601466]
  When LLM agents work together, they seem to be more powerful than a single LLM in mathematical question answering.<n>We investigate this question using adversarially perturbed math questions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-10T13:58:17Z)
• AgenTracer: Who Is Inducing Failure in the LLM Agentic Systems? [71.21547572568655]
  AgenTracer-8B is a lightweight failure tracer trained with multi-granular reinforcement learning.<n>On the Who&When benchmark, AgenTracer-8B outperforms giant proprietary LLMs like Gemini-2.5-Pro and Claude-4-Sonnet by up to 18.18%.<n>AgenTracer-8B delivers actionable feedback to off-the-shelf multi-agent systems like MetaGPT and MaAS with 4.8-14.2% performance gains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-03T13:42:14Z)
• 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.<n>We develop and evaluate three automated failure attribution methods, summarizing their corresponding pros and cons.<n>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)
• LLMSR@XLLM25: Less is More: Enhancing Structured Multi-Agent Reasoning via Quality-Guided Distillation [6.920352059545929]
  We present Less is More, the third-place winning approach in the LLMSR@XLLM25 structural reasoning task.<n>Our approach leverages a multi-agent framework with reverse-prompt induction, retrieval-augmented reasoning synthesis via GPT-4o, and dual-stage reward-guided filtering.<n>All modules are fine-tuned from Meta-Llama-3-8B-Instruct under a unified LoRA+ setup.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-23T04:19:52Z)
• 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)
• MAgICoRe: Multi-Agent, Iterative, Coarse-to-Fine Refinement for Reasoning [60.55556283848063]
  Large Language Models' (LLM) reasoning can be improved using test-time aggregation strategies, i.e., generating multiple samples and voting among generated samples. Refinement offers an alternative by using LLM-generated feedback to improve solution quality. We propose MAgICoRe, which avoids excessive refinement by categorizing problem difficulty as easy or hard.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-18T17:12:41Z)
• On the Resilience of LLM-Based Multi-Agent Collaboration with Faulty Agents [58.79302663733703]
  Large language model-based multi-agent systems have shown great abilities across various tasks due to the collaboration of expert agents.<n>The impact of clumsy or even malicious agents--those who frequently make errors in their tasks--on the overall performance of the system remains underexplored.<n>This paper investigates what is the resilience of various system structures under faulty agents on different downstream tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-02T03:25:20Z)
• Octo-planner: On-device Language Model for Planner-Action Agents [19.627197141903505]
  Planner-Action framework separates planning and action execution into two distinct components. Agent first responds to user queries by decomposing tasks into a sequence of sub-steps, which are then executed by the action agent. We employ model fine-tuning instead of in-context learning, reducing computational costs and energy consumption.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-26T05:40:10Z)
• Segment, Select, Correct: A Framework for Weakly-Supervised Referring Segmentation [63.13635858586001]
  Referring Image (RIS) is the problem of identifying objects in images through natural language sentences. We propose a novel weakly-supervised framework that tackles RIS by decomposing it into three steps. Using only the first two steps (zero-shot segment and select) outperforms other zero-shot baselines by as much as 16.5%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-20T13:20:17Z)
• The CoT Collection: Improving Zero-shot and Few-shot Learning of Language Models via Chain-of-Thought Fine-Tuning [50.75534397373867]
  Language models (LMs) with less than 100B parameters are known to perform poorly on chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning. In this work, we aim to equip smaller LMs with the step-by-step reasoning capability by instruction tuning with CoT rationales.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-23T13:14:59Z)

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.