DynaDebate: Breaking Homogeneity in Multi-Agent Debate with Dynamic Path Generation
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Social simulation and multi-agent debate
Abstract (arXiv)
Recent years have witnessed the rapid development of Large Language Model-based Multi-Agent Systems (MAS), which excel at collaborative decision-making and complex problem-solving. Researchers have further investigated Multi-Agent Debate (MAD) frameworks, which enhance the reasoning and collaboration capabilities of MAS through information exchange and debate among multiple agents. However, existing approaches often rely on unguided initialization, causing agents to adopt identical reasoning paths that lead to the same errors. As a result, effective debate among agents is hindered, and the final outcome frequently degenerates into simple majority voting. To solve the above problem, we introduce Dynamic Multi-Agent Debate (DynaDebate), which enhances the effectiveness of multi-agent debate through three key mechanisms: (1) Dynamic Path Generation and Allocation, which employs a dedicated Path Generation Agent to generate diverse and logical solution paths with adaptive redundancy; (2) Process-Centric Debate, which shifts the focus from surface-level outcome voting to rigorous step-by-step logic critique to ensure process correctness; (3) A Trigger-Based Verification Agent, which is activated upon disagreement and uses external tools to objectively resolve deadlocks. Experiments show that DynaDebate achieves superior or highly competitive performance across the majority of benchmarksfootnoteThe code is at https://github.com/nwpuLee2021/brianstorm..
Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Social simulation and multi-agent debate, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 22 of its 29 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 9 Jan 2026.
Builds on
22 of 29 references.
Closest ancestors · 6
Same direction, newest first
- 2025Enhancing Multi-Agent Debate System Performance via Confidence Expression17 Sep
- 2025Talk Isn't Always Cheap: Understanding Failure Modes in Multi-Agent Debate5 Sep
- 2025Debate or Vote: Which Yields Better Decisions in Multi-Agent Large Language Models?24 Aug
- 2023Should we be going MAD? A Look at Multi-Agent Debate Strategies for LLMs29 Nov
- 2023Encouraging Divergent Thinking in Large Language Models through Multi-Agent Debate30 May
- 2023Generative Agents: Interactive Simulacra of Human Behavior7 Apr
Other references · 16
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
- 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 10,109
- 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,695
- 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,963
- 2022Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Modelscited by 5,708
- 2023Toolformer: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Use Toolscited by 4,182
- 2023Let's Verify Step by Stepcited by 3,789
- 2023GPQA: A Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A Benchmarkcited by 2,879
- 2023ToolLLM: Facilitating Large Language Models to Master 16000+ Real-world APIscited by 1,947
- 2023Improving Factuality and Reasoning in Language Models through Multiagent Debatecited by 1,784
- 2022Program of Thoughts Prompting: Disentangling Computation from Reasoning for Numerical Reasoning Taskscited by 1,076
- 2022Language Models as Zero-Shot Planners: Extracting Actionable Knowledge for Embodied Agentscited by 1,035
4 more
- 2023CRITIC: Large Language Models Can Self-Correct with Tool-Interactive Critiquingcited by 783
- 2023ChatEval: Towards Better LLM-based Evaluators through Multi-Agent Debatecited by 742
- 2024Improving Multi-Agent Debate with Sparse Communication Topologycited by 107
- 2025VerifiAgent: a Unified Verification Agent in Language Model Reasoningcited by 10
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 5.
5 papers.
- 2026Epistemic Gain, Aleatoric Cost: Uncertainty Decomposition in Multi-Agent Debate for Math Reasoningcited by 5
- 2026STRIDE: Strategic Iterative Decision-Making for Retrieval-Augmented Multi-Hop Question Answeringcited by 1
- 2026Memory-Augmented LLM-based Multi-Agent System for Automated Feature Generation on Tabular Datacited by 0
- 2026Group Perspective Matters: Regulating Debate Relationships Can Mitigate Blind Conformity in Multi-Agent Debatecited by 0
- 2026Beyond Symmetric Agents: Cognitive Diversity and Multi-Agent Debate in Small Language Modelscited by 0
- 2026Beyond Symmetric Agents: Cognitive Diversity and Multi-Agent Debate in Small Language Models26 Sep 2026
- 2026Group Perspective Matters: Regulating Debate Relationships Can Mitigate Blind Conformity in Multi-Agent Debate4 Aug 2026
- 2026Memory-Augmented LLM-based Multi-Agent System for Automated Feature Generation on Tabular Data22 Apr 2026
- 2026STRIDE: Strategic Iterative Decision-Making for Retrieval-Augmented Multi-Hop Question Answering19 Apr 2026
- 2026Epistemic Gain, Aleatoric Cost: Uncertainty Decomposition in Multi-Agent Debate for Math Reasoning1 Mar 2026
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Multi-Agent Debate Strategies: Survey, Taxonomy, and Challenges
- 2026Mixture of Debaters: Learn to Debate at Architectural Level in Multi-Agent Reasoning
- 2026HCP-MAD:Heterogeneous Consensus-Progressive Reasoning for Efficient Multi-Agent Debate
- 2025Free-MAD: Consensus-Free Multi-Agent Debate
- 2026Efficient Multi-Agent Reasoning via Confidence-Guided Adaptive Debate
- 2024GroupDebate: Enhancing the Efficiency of Multi-Agent Debate Using Group Discussion
- 2026Demystifying Multi-Agent Debate: The Role of Confidence and Diversity
- 2025Revisiting Multi-Agent Debate as Test-Time Scaling: A Systematic Study of Conditional Effectiveness