# CortexDebate: Debating Sparsely and Equally for Multi-Agent Debate

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.03928 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.03928/

## Key facts

- Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Reasoning for agents, planning and code, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 37 of its 54 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 5 Jul 2025.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Reasoning for agents, planning and code](https://mlsanity.com/lr/reasoning-for-agents-planning-and-code/)
- LLM agents and tool use / [Social simulation and multi-agent debate](https://mlsanity.com/agents/social-simulation-and-multi-agent-debate/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 37)

- [The Llama 3 Herd of Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21783/) (2024)
- [Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.14168/) (2021)
- [Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.03300/) (2020)
- [Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.11171/) (2022)
- [Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the MATH Dataset](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.03874/) (2021)
- [Think you have Solved Question Answering? Try ARC, the AI2 Reasoning Challenge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.05457/) (2018)
- [Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasoners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.11916/) (2022)
- [SQuAD: 100,000+ Questions for Machine Comprehension of Text](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1606.05250/) (2016)
- [Lost in the Middle: How Language Models Use Long Contexts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.03172/) (2023)
- [Training Compute-Optimal Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.15556/) (2022)
- [GPQA: A Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.12022/) (2023)
- [MMLU-Pro: A More Robust and Challenging Multi-Task Language Understanding Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.01574/) (2024)
- [Improving Factuality and Reasoning in Language Models through Multiagent Debate](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14325/) (2023)
- [LongBench: A Bilingual, Multitask Benchmark for Long Context Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.14508/) (2023)
- [Encouraging Divergent Thinking in Large Language Models through Multi-Agent Debate](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.19118/) (2023)
- [Large Language Models Can Be Easily Distracted by Irrelevant Context](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.00093/) (2023)
- [ChatEval: Towards Better LLM-based Evaluators through Multi-Agent Debate](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.07201/) (2023)
- [ReConcile: Round-Table Conference Improves Reasoning via Consensus among Diverse LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.13007/) (2023)
- [Debating with More Persuasive LLMs Leads to More Truthful Answers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.06782/) (2024)
- [RECOMP: Improving Retrieval-Augmented LMs with Compression and Selective Augmentation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.04408/) (2023)
- [Exploring Collaboration Mechanisms for LLM Agents: A Social Psychology View](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.02124/) (2023)
- [Improving Multi-Agent Debate with Sparse Communication Topology](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.11776/) (2024)
- [Examining Inter-Consistency of Large Language Models Collaboration: An In-depth Analysis via Debate](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.11595/) (2023)
- [Exchange-of-Thought: Enhancing Large Language Model Capabilities through Cross-Model Communication](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.01823/) (2023)
- [Corex: Pushing the Boundaries of Complex Reasoning through Multi-Model Collaboration](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.00280/) (2023)
- [GroupDebate: Enhancing the Efficiency of Multi-Agent Debate Using Group Discussion](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.14051/) (2024)
- [Scalable AI Safety via Doubly-Efficient Debate](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.14125/) (2023)
- [FuseChat: Knowledge Fusion of Chat Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.07990/) (2024)
- [Let Models Speak Ciphers: Multiagent Debate through Embeddings](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.06272/) (2023)
- [Towards Reasoning in Large Language Models via Multi-Agent Peer Review Collaboration](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.08152/) (2023)

## Built on by (most cited first, 7 of 7)

- [CascadeDebate: Multi-Agent Deliberation for Cost-Aware LLM Cascades](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.12262/) (2026)
- [Multi-Agent Debate Strategies: Survey, Taxonomy, and Challenges](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.26212/) (2026)
- [Hybrid-IR: Dual-Path Hybrid Retrieval with Iterative Reasoning for Complex Medical Question Answering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.25338/) (2026)
- [Who Are They to Each Other? Multi-Agent Reasoning for Speaker Relationship Inference](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.09628/) (2026)
- [From Process Loss to Assembly Bonus: Human-Grounded Diagnosis of Multi-Agent LLM Collaboration](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.13261/) (2026)
- [Do We Need Complex Topology Control? Distinct-Peer Random Routing Improves Cost-Efficiency in Sparse Multi-Agent Debate](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.27150/) (2026)
- [PFedMA: Who Should Join Next as Federated Multi-Agent Orchestration Evolves?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.19458/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Nowadays, single Large Language Model (LLM) struggles with critical issues such as hallucination and inadequate reasoning abilities. To mitigate these issues, Multi-Agent Debate (MAD) has emerged as an effective strategy, where LLM agents engage in in-depth debates with others on tasks. However, existing MAD methods face two major issues: (a) too lengthy input contexts, which causes LLM agents to get lost in plenty of input information and experiences performance drop; and (b) the overconfidence dilemma, where self-assured LLM agents dominate the debate, leading to low debating effectiveness. To address these limitations, we propose a novel MAD method called "CortexDebate". Inspired by the human brain's tendency to establish a sparse and dynamically optimized network among cortical areas governed by white matter, CortexDebate constructs a sparse debating graph among LLM agents, where each LLM agent only debates with the ones that are helpful to it. To optimize the graph, we propose a module named McKinsey-based Debate Matter (MDM), which acts as an artificial analog to white matter. By integrating the McKinsey Trust Formula, a well-established measure of trustworthiness from sociology, MDM enables credible evaluations that guide graph optimization. The effectiveness of our CortexDebate has been well demonstrated by extensive experimental results across eight datasets from four task types.