# Self-signals Driven Multi-LLM Debate for Efficient and Accurate Reasoning

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.06843 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.06843/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 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 25 of its 42 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 8 Oct 2025.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Reasoning for agents, planning and code](https://mlsanity.com/lr/reasoning-for-agents-planning-and-code/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 25 of 25)

- [Language Models are Few-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.14165/) (2020)
- [The Llama 3 Herd of Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21783/) (2024)
- [Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.11903/) (2022)
- [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)
- [Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasoners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.11916/) (2022)
- [Tree of Thoughts: Deliberate Problem Solving with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.10601/) (2023)
- [GPQA: A Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.12022/) (2023)
- [Efficient Streaming Language Models with Attention Sinks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.17453/) (2023)
- [Learn to Explain: Multimodal Reasoning via Thought Chains for Science Question Answering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2209.09513/) (2022)
- [MMLU-Pro: A More Robust and Challenging Multi-Task Language Understanding Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.01574/) (2024)
- [gpt-oss-120b & gpt-oss-20b Model Card](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.10925/) (2025)
- [Encouraging Divergent Thinking in Large Language Models through Multi-Agent Debate](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.19118/) (2023)
- [Are We on the Right Way for Evaluating Large Vision-Language Models?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.20330/) (2024)
- [Just Ask for Calibration: Strategies for Eliciting Calibrated Confidence Scores from Language Models Fine-Tuned with Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14975/) (2023)
- [GLM-4.5V and GLM-4.1V-Thinking: Towards Versatile Multimodal Reasoning with Scalable Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.01006/) (2025)
- [LLMs-as-Judges: A Comprehensive Survey on LLM-based Evaluation Methods](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.05579/) (2024)
- [Take a Step Back: Evoking Reasoning via Abstraction in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.06117/) (2023)
- [Improving Multi-Agent Debate with Sparse Communication Topology](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.11776/) (2024)
- [Self-Contrast: Better Reflection Through Inconsistent Solving Perspectives](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.02009/) (2024)
- [GroupDebate: Enhancing the Efficiency of Multi-Agent Debate Using Group Discussion](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.14051/) (2024)
- [Uncertainty in Natural Language Processing: Sources, Quantification, and Applications](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.04459/) (2023)
- [Position: Uncertainty Quantification Needs Reassessment for Large-language Model Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.22655/) (2025)
- [Overconfidence in LLM-as-a-Judge: Diagnosis and Confidence-Driven Solution](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.06225/) (2025)
- [Retrv-R1: A Reasoning-Driven MLLM Framework for Universal and Efficient Multimodal Retrieval](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.02745/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [MAR:Multi-Agent Reflexion Improves Reasoning Abilities in LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.20845/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Large Language Models (LLMs) have exhibited impressive capabilities across diverse application domains. Recent work has explored Multi-LLM Agent Debate (MAD) as a way to enhance performance by enabling multiple LLMs to discuss and refine responses iteratively. Nevertheless, existing MAD methods predominantly focus on utilizing external structures, such as debate graphs, using LLM-as-a-Judge, while neglecting the application of self signals, such as token logits and attention, that arise during generation. This omission leads to redundant computation and potential performance degradation. In this paper, we shift the focus to the self signals of multi-LLM debate and introduce a Self-Signals Driven Multi-LLM Debate (SID), which leverages two types of self-signals: model-level confidence and token-level semantic focus, to adaptively guide the debate process. Our approach enables high-confidence agents to exit early at the model level and compress the redundant debate contents based on the attention mechanism. We evaluate our method on various LLMs and Multimodal LLMs across multiple challenging benchmarks. Experimental results demonstrate that our method not only outperforms existing MAD techniques in accuracy but also reduces token consumption, highlighting the effectiveness of utilizing self signals in enhancing both the performance and efficiency of multi-agent debate systems. Our code will be available at~hrefhttps://github.com/xuhang2019/SIDtexttthttps://github.com/xuhang2019/SID.