TriAgent: Divergence-Aware Multi-Agent Committees for Cost-Efficient Financial Sentiment Analysis

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.19794v1
• Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2026 06:20:32 GMT
• Title: TriAgent: Divergence-Aware Multi-Agent Committees for Cost-Efficient Financial Sentiment Analysis
• Abstract summary: 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.
• Score: 0.9861185030860833
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Production LLM-based financial sentiment analysis faces a structural cost trap: most queries are trivially classifiable, yet expensive cloud reasoners process them all, and the bill scales linearly with user count. We present TriAgent, a multi-agent committee stratified by contextual granularity -- a word-level lexicon (VADER), a sentence-level domain transformer (FinBERT), and a cross-sentence reasoner (Qwen2.5, 0.5B-14B-4bit, with Mistral-7B and Phi-3.5-mini cross-family checks). A three-way Semantic Divergence Index (SDI) measures pairwise disagreement across granularities and routes each query accordingly. Our central finding is the critic plateau: when the LLM is re-tasked as a critic over the smaller agents' outputs, F1 plateaus at ~0.87 across 1.5B-7B Qwen (bootstrap 95% CIs overlap), while a same-size 3-persona vote drops to F1=0.66, which is driven by granularity-stratified diversity. Three corollaries follow from the same SDI signal: (i) a Shared Consensus Dictionary on multilingual sentence-BERT answers 95% of Chinese queries from an English cache at F1=0.99 -- cross-border canonicalization at zero marginal cost; (ii) SDI doubles as a post-hoc LLM-hallucination detector at AUC=0.90; (iii) the SDI single-stage strategy attains the best risk-adjusted return (Sharpe=3.50) on a 20-ticker back-test, dominating both always-FinBERT (1.36) and always-LLM (0.11). At 10M-user scale, TriAgent saves $9.3M/year vs. a GPT-4o-mini baseline. Code, lexicons, and the SCD are released.

Related papers

• Your Retriever Already Knows: Distribution-Shape QPP for RAG Retrieval Sufficiency [0.0]
  Motivated by a Czech nuclear-regulator deployment, we compare three Query Performance Prediction (QPP) paradigms for retrieval sufficiency in RAG.<n>Our 24 non-lexical features reach a weighted-average AUROC of 0.856 at 2 ms per query, ahead of a classic-QPP literature pool.<n>Adding the LLM judgment as one feature (hybrid) matches S1 on ViDoRe (0.863) but gains a statistically significant edge on SJB.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-10T14:52:16Z)
• Codebook Agent: Amortized Topology Design for LLM Multi-Agent Systems [67.04448659688579]
  We develop a query-independent 16-entry codebook that ranks the top decoded candidates in a single batched forward pass.<n>With no iterative search and no message passing at test time, Codebook Agent is the most accurate method on all six benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-02T08:10:22Z)
• Deployment Decision Reliability: A Generalizability-Theory Framework for Sizing Long-Horizon Agent Evaluations [0.0]
  We show, across three open agent-trace benchmarks, that the agent main effect accounts for less than 3% of total variance in every dataset and check type.<n>We arrive at this through a four-facet Generalizability Theory variance decomposition, fit with three estimators.<n>We package these into Deployment Decision Reliability (DDR), a one-page reporting discipline that turns the variance-component table into five decisions an enterprise buyer can defend.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-11T18:16:51Z)
• InvestPhilBench: A Multi-Layer Dynamic Benchmark for Evaluating Large Language Model Procedural Reasoning in Expert Investment Philosophy [0.9924185669370708]
  InvestPhilBench is a dynamic benchmark spanning eight cognitive tiers.<n>The v0.6 release comprises 118 primary-source-verified investment principle cards.<n>For reproducible scoring at scale we introduce the Benchmark Automated Scoring Pipeline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-24T15:53:20Z)
• AgentFairBench: Do LLM Agents Discriminate When They Act? [2.3004655342211078]
  AgentFairBench is a cheap, reproducible, multi-domain benchmark for demographic disparity in the actions of LLM agents.<n>It spans three regulator-anchored domains: hiring, lending, and medical triage.<n>A NumPy-only harness computes counterfactual flip rate, mean absolute score difference (MASD), action-rate disparity, and tool-invocation disparity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-15T13:50:26Z)
• Which Defense Closes Which Threat? Attributing OWASP-LLM-Top-10 Coverage and Its Brittleness Under Paraphrasing [51.56484100374058]
  Production LLM applications stack several defense families -- refusal-phrase filters, tokenbudget controls, model allowlists, rate limits, tool-registry authentication -- yetBAS benchmarks report a single aggregate coverage number.<n>We add four-LLM-Top-10-aware agents to a 21-agent baseline scanner and target a lattice of four synthetic LLM endpoints.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-01T19:39:25Z)
• Attributing Emergence in Million-Agent Systems [68.53670424791751]
  Large language models (LLMs) can simulate human-like reasoning and decision-making in individual agents.<n>Such studies require attributing macro emergence to individual agents.<n>We adapt Aumann--Shapley path-integral attribution to LLM-powered MAS at million-agent scale.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-12T01:49:41Z)
• ComplexMCP: Evaluation of LLM Agents in Dynamic, Interdependent, and Large-Scale Tool Sandbox [61.862814740220806]
  $textbfComplexMCP$ is a benchmark designed to evaluate agents in rigorous conditions.<n>Built on the Model Context Protocol (MCP), $textbfComplexMCP$ provides over 300 meticulously tested tools.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-11T16:20:51Z)
• Between the Layers Lies the Truth: Uncertainty Estimation in LLMs Using Intra-Layer Local Information Scores [36.86032736109853]
  Large language models (LLMs) are often confidently wrong, making reliable uncertainty estimation (UE) essential.<n>We propose a compact, per-instance UE method that scores cross-layer patterns in internal representations using a single forward pass.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-17T08:35:14Z)
• RefineBench: Evaluating Refinement Capability of Language Models via Checklists [71.02281792867531]
  We evaluate two refinement modes: guided refinement and self-refinement.<n>In guided refinement, both proprietary LMs and large open-weight LMs can leverage targeted feedback to refine responses to near-perfect levels within five turns.<n>These findings suggest that frontier LMs require breakthroughs to self-refine their incorrect responses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-27T07:20:52Z)
• Identity-Link IRT for Label-Free LLM Evaluation: Preserving Additivity in TVD-MI Scores [3.959606869996232]
  We show that averaging TVD-MI's binary trials yields centered-probability scores with additive structure suitable for item-response theory (IRT) without nonlinear link functions.<n>We derive this clipped-linear evaluations from Gini entropy, yielding a box-constrained least-squares formulation that handles boundary saturation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-16T17:59:25Z)
• Runaway is Ashamed, But Helpful: On the Early-Exit Behavior of Large Language Model-based Agents in Embodied Environments [54.67512489842682]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated strong planning and decision-making capabilities in complex embodied environments.<n>We take a first step toward exploring the early-exit behavior for LLM-based agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-23T08:23:36Z)

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.