CUSP: Decomposable Collective Uncertainty for Multi-Agent Multimodal Reasoning
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2609.05708v1
- Date: Fri, 04 Sep 2026 20:27:47 GMT
- Title: CUSP: Decomposable Collective Uncertainty for Multi-Agent Multimodal Reasoning
- Abstract summary: We present CUSP, a training-free uncertainty framework that maps multiple VLM responses to a shared semantic response space.<n>We report two complementary system-level signals: collective uncertainty, the dispersion of the pooled opinion, and Jensen-Shannon divergence (JSD)<n>In static multi-VLM ensembles, collective uncertainty is the strongest signal in the small-model regime.
- Score: 6.428392127849263
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: Aggregating heterogeneous vision-language models (VLMs) can improve multimodal reasoning, but neither an individual model's confidence nor that of the aggregated answer measures reliability at the system level. We present CUSP (Collective Uncertainty through Semantic Opinion Pooling), a training-free uncertainty quantification framework that maps multiple VLM responses to a shared semantic response space, pools them into a pooled semantic opinion, and reports two complementary system-level signals: collective uncertainty, the dispersion of the pooled opinion, and Jensen-Shannon divergence (JSD), the conflict among the model-level opinions. Within this pooled semantic opinion, the unnormalized collective entropy decomposes exactly into the mean of the models' individual semantic entropies and the JSD, separating total dispersion from model conflict. Requiring neither token logits nor calibration labels, CUSP applies to open-weight and commercial VLMs alike. In static multi-VLM ensembles, collective uncertainty is the strongest signal in the small-model regime (0.764 AUROC for prediction-error detection, 0.889 AUARC for abstention), outperforming uncertainty baselines majority voting and naive selection by 4.7 to 15.8 points and widening its margin as the ensemble grows; JSD is strongest in the evaluated commercial regime (0.819 AUROC, 0.910 AUARC) and ranks hard-answer model conflict with AUROC up to 0.982. The pooled prediction also improves accuracy over the average single model by 5.6 to 13.0 points. Over the full trajectory of a multi-step, multi-agent system, subagent collective uncertainty ranks system failures above chance (0.619 AUROC) and gives the best abstention ordering among the evaluated signals (0.699 AUARC).
Related papers
- Calibration-Aware Uncertainty Cascades for Efficient Heterogeneous Model Collaboration [18.045450334322545]
Heterogeneous model collaboration seeks to exploit the complementary strengths of different models to balance predictive performance and inference cost.<n>Existing approaches typically rely on trained routers, which tie routing decisions to a fixed task and model pool, or on raw-confidence cascades, whose thresholds lack consistent reliability semantics across heterogeneous models.<n>We propose-Aware Uncertainty Cascades (CAUC), a simple post-hoc framework that independently calibrates each model's confidence and selects deployment policies using validation data.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-09-10T12:14:54Z) - Design and Evaluation of Multi-Agent AI Oracle Systems for Prediction Market Resolution [0.0]
Prediction markets aggregate collective intelligence to forecast uncertain events.<n>Existing oracle systems tradeoff fast but brittle automation against accurate but costly human arbitration.<n>We evaluate whether multi-agent LLM architectures can improve oracle resolution accuracy over single-model baselines.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-05-29T03:44:19Z) - OmniISR: A Unified Framework for Centralized and Federated Learning via Intermediate Supervision and Regularization [58.03221830946145]
We propose OmniISR, a unified framework that fuses pure CL, pure FL, and hybrid CL-FL training modes.<n>We show that OmniISR consistently improves model performance in both centralized and federated paradigms.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-05-19T04:13:27Z) - Preserving Disagreement: Architectural Heterogeneity and Coherence Validation in Multi-Agent Policy Simulation [0.0]
Multi-agent deliberation systems using large language models (LLMs) are increasingly proposed for policy simulation.<n>They suffer from artificial consensus: evaluator agents converge on the same option regardless of their assigned value perspectives.<n>We present the AI Council, a three-phase deliberation framework, and conduct 120 deliberations across two policy scenarios to test two interventions.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-04-29T11:47:28Z) - Too Correct to Learn: Reinforcement Learning on Saturated Reasoning Data [55.84428098924793]
We propose Constrained Uniform Top-K Sampling (CUTS), a parameter-free decoding strategy enforcing structure-preserving exploration.<n>We integrate this into Mixed-CUTS, a training framework synergizing exploitative and exploratory rollouts to amplify intra-group advantage variance.<n> Notably, Mixed-CUTS improves Pass@1 accuracy on the challenging AIME25 benchmark by up to 15.1% over standard GRPO.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-04-20T16:43:28Z) - How Independent are Large Language Models? A Statistical Framework for Auditing Behavioral Entanglement and Reweighting Verifier Ensembles [46.63622714488747]
Shared pretraining data, distillation, and alignment pipelines can induce hidden behavioral dependencies, latent entanglement.<n>In practice, this manifests as correlated reasoning patterns and synchronized failures.<n>We develop a statistical framework for auditing behavioral entanglement among black-box language models.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-04-08T23:32:06Z) - SCoOP: Semantic Consistent Opinion Pooling for Uncertainty Quantification in Multiple Vision-Language Model Systems [6.96926551349545]
We propose SCoOP (Semantic-Consistent Opinion Pooling) for multi-VLM systems.<n>The core idea is to treat each VLM as a probabilistic "expert," sample multiple outputs, map them to a unified space, aggregate their opinions, and produce a system-level uncertainty score.<n>On ScienceQA, SCoOP achieves an AUROC of 0.866 for hallucination detection, outperforming baselines (0.732-0.757) by approximately 10-13%.<n>For abstention, it attains an AURAC of 0.907, exceeding baselines (0.818-0.840) by 7-9%.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-03-25T02:30:48Z) - CARE What Fails: Contrastive Anchored-REflection for Verifiable Multimodal [84.71254539482369]
Group-relative reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) often wastes the most informative data it already has the failures.<n>We present CARE, a failure-centric post-training framework for multimodal reasoning that turns errors into supervision.<n> CARE improves accuracy and training smoothness while explicitly increasing the share of learning signal that comes from failures.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-12-22T16:34:21Z) - 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) - Harnessing Consistency for Robust Test-Time LLM Ensemble [88.55393815158608]
CoRE is a plug-and-play technique that harnesses model consistency for robust LLM ensemble.<n> Token-level consistency captures fine-grained disagreements by applying a low-pass filter to downweight uncertain tokens.<n>Model-level consistency models global agreement by promoting model outputs with high self-confidence.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-10-12T04:18:45Z)
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.