Agent-as-Peer-Debriefer: A Multi-Agent Framework with Perspective-Based Refinement for Qualitative Analysis

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.24600v1
• Date: Sat, 23 May 2026 14:30:42 GMT
• Title: Agent-as-Peer-Debriefer: A Multi-Agent Framework with Perspective-Based Refinement for Qualitative Analysis
• Abstract summary: We propose Agent-as-Peer-Debriefer, a multi-agent QDA framework that builds peer debriefing into key coding steps.<n>In our framework, a Hierarchical Coding Agent follows the standard QDA process to generate codes, sub-themes, and themes, along with self-explanations and memos.<n>These perspectives are drawn from established human QDA practices that generalize across domains and datasets.
• Score: 7.023354761776525
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for qualitative data analysis (QDA), yet their outputs often miss the depth and nuance of human analysis. We argue this gap reflects a missing credibility practice from human QDA: peer debriefing, in which an analyst seeks feedback from a disinterested peer and uses it to refine their coding. To bring this practice into LLM-assisted QDA, we propose Agent-as-Peer-Debriefer, a multi-agent QDA framework that builds peer debriefing into key coding steps. In our framework, a Hierarchical Coding Agent follows the standard QDA process to generate codes, sub-themes, and themes, along with self-explanations and reflection memos. It then shares these outputs with three Peer-Debriefing Agents, each applying a distinct analytical perspective (Theory-Driven, Data-Driven, or Applied) and refining the codes by keeping, renaming, reassigning, merging, or splitting them. These perspectives are drawn from established human QDA practices that generalize across domains and datasets. To evaluate the framework, we test it on three datasets across two domains with three LLMs, measuring semantic similarity to human-annotated codes. Across all settings, perspective-based, peer-debriefing refinement aligns more closely with human codes than a single-LLM baseline, and an ablation further shows the gain is not merely from additional refinement. The three perspectives also produce distinct trade-offs, showing that the choice of perspective is a meaningful and controllable design decision. More broadly, these findings suggest that simulating peer debriefing with explicit perspectives is a promising route to more credible LLM-assisted QDA.

Related papers

• How AI Coders Discuss, Disagree, and Reach Consensus: Challenges and Opportunities for LLM-Based Qualitative Coding [5.271725890500162]
  We develop a literature-informed baseline pipeline that enables AI agents to independently code, debate, and reconcile disagreements.<n>Results revealed that coding accuracy depends on factors such as codebook length, qualitative data similarity, and agent disagreement.<n>Our open-source AI discussion dataset and methodological framework lay the groundwork for advancing the design of AI-mediated automated thematic analysis.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-10T05:34:47Z)
• IDEAgent: Agentic Quality-Diversity Search for Research Idea Generation [43.08002957114291]
  We argue that research ideation should be treated as a conjunction of both objectives and framed as a Quality-Diversity (QD) search.<n>We jointly drive Quality using multi-objective feedback for dedicated repair and refinement, while Diversity is achieved through lightweight sequential memory.<n>We show that IDEAgent outperforms the best baseline by 3.89x on Yield, while achieving non-zero Yield on 8x more topics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-24T15:03:14Z)
• Agentic Collaborative Cognition for Zero-Shot 3D Understanding [57.854375071638856]
  We propose a collaborative multi-agent framework that assigns a Planning Agent to handle high-level viewpoint planning.<n>Perception Agent to explicitly summarize the 3D scene into a structured holistic cognitive map.<n>Our method achieves state-of-the-art performance on 6 benchmarks, with improvements of 11.1% Acc@0.5 on ScanRefer, 14.6 BLEU-1 on 3D-assisted dialog, and 2.1 EM on SQA3D.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-23T14:44:04Z)
• Code as Agent Harness [107.31925305395957]
  In emerging agentic systems, code is no longer only a target output.<n>Code increasingly serves as an operational substrate for agent reasoning, acting, environment modeling, and execution-based verification.<n>This survey provides a unified roadmap toward executable, verifiable, and stateful AI agent systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-18T17:59:03Z)
• Co-Refine: AI-Powered Tool Supporting Qualitative Analysis [6.199710730080277]
  We present Co-Refine, an AI-augmented qualitative coding platform that delivers continuous, grounded feedback on coding consistency.<n>The system employs a three-stage audit pipeline: Stage 1 computes deterministic embedding-based metrics for mathematical consistency; Stage 2 grounds LLM verdicts within $pm0.15$ of the deterministic scores; Stage 3 produces code definitions from previous patterns to create a deepening feedback loop.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-21T10:16:13Z)
• MC-Search: Evaluating and Enhancing Multimodal Agentic Search with Structured Long Reasoning Chains [79.14584837105808]
  We present MC-Search, the first benchmark for agentic MM-RAG with long, step-wise annotated reasoning chains spanning five representative reasoning structures.<n>Beyond answer accuracy, MC-Search introduces new process-level metrics for reasoning quality, stepwise retrieval and planning accuracy.<n>By developing a unified agentic MM-RAG pipeline, we benchmark six leading MLLMs and reveal systematic issues such as over- and under-retrieval and modality-misaligned planning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-01T02:25:57Z)
• Disagreement as Data: Reasoning Trace Analytics in Multi-Agent Systems [0.0]
  We propose that reasoning traces generated by large language model (LLM) agents constitute a novel and rich form of process data.<n>We apply cosine similarity to reasoning traces to systematically detect, quantify, and interpret disagreements among agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-18T23:19:49Z)
• A Survey of Vibe Coding with Large Language Models [93.88284590533242]
  "Vibe Coding" is a development methodology where developers validate AI-generated implementations through outcome observation.<n>Despite its transformative potential, the effectiveness of this emergent paradigm remains under-explored.<n>This survey provides the first comprehensive and systematic review of Vibe Coding with large language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-14T11:26:56Z)
• CoDA: Agentic Systems for Collaborative Data Visualization [57.270599188947294]
  Deep research has revolutionized data analysis, yet data scientists still devote substantial time to manually crafting visualizations.<n>Existing approaches, including simple single- or multi-agent systems, often oversimplify the task.<n>We introduce CoDA, a multi-agent system that employs specialized LLM agents for metadata analysis, task planning, code generation, and self-reflection.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-03T17:30:16Z)
• Illuminating LLM Coding Agents: Visual Analytics for Deeper Understanding and Enhancement [16.472150248814767]
  We introduce a visual analytics system designed to enhance the examination of coding agent behaviors.<n>Our system enables ML scientists to gain a structured understanding of agent behaviors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-18T01:17:11Z)
• Data-to-Dashboard: Multi-Agent LLM Framework for Insightful Visualization in Enterprise Analytics [2.7933239275667545]
  We present an agentic system that automates the data-to-dashboard pipeline through modular LLM agents.<n>Unlike existing chart systems, our framework simulates the analytical reasoning process of business analysts.<n>Our approach shows improved insightfulness, domain relevance, and analytical depth, as measured by tailored evaluation metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-29T17:32:15Z)
• IDA-Bench: Evaluating LLMs on Interactive Guided Data Analysis [60.32962597618861]
  IDA-Bench is a novel benchmark evaluating large language models in multi-round interactive scenarios.<n>Agent performance is judged by comparing its final numerical output to the human-derived baseline.<n>Even state-of-the-art coding agents (like Claude-3.7-thinking) succeed on 50% of the tasks, highlighting limitations not evident in single-turn tests.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-23T09:37:52Z)
• Self-Agreement: A Framework for Fine-tuning Language Models to Find Agreement among Diverse Opinions [1.6752182911522517]
  Self-Agreement is a novel framework for fine-tuning large language models to autonomously find agreement. Our approach employs the generative pre-trained transformer-3 to generate multiple opinions for each question in a question dataset. A bidirectional encoder representations from transformers (BERT)-based model selects the one with the highest agreement score. Remarkably, a pre-trained LLM fine-tuned by our Self-Agreement framework achieves comparable performance to GPT-3 with only 1/25 of its parameters.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-19T06:27:16Z)

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.