# Can Small Agents Collaborate to Beat a Single Large Language Model?

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.11327 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.11327/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use.
- Builds on 15 of its 21 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 16 Jan 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM agents and tool use / [General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks](https://mlsanity.com/agents/general-llm-agent-frameworks-and-benchmarks/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 15 of 15)

- [Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.11903/) (2022)
- [Toolformer: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Use Tools](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.04761/) (2023)
- [GPQA: A Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.12022/) (2023)
- [MetaGPT: Meta Programming for A Multi-Agent Collaborative Framework](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.00352/) (2023)
- [OpenHands: An Open Platform for AI Software Developers as Generalist Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.16741/) (2024)
- [MuSiQue: Multihop Questions via Single-hop Question Composition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.00573/) (2021)
- [Humanity's Last Exam](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.14249/) (2025)
- [The Illusion of Thinking: Understanding the Strengths and Limitations of Reasoning Models via the Lens of Problem Complexity](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.06941/) (2025)
- [Agentic Reasoning: A Streamlined Framework for Enhancing LLM Reasoning with Agentic Tools](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.04644/) (2025)
- [HyperAgent: Generalist Software Engineering Agents to Solve Coding Tasks at Scale](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.16299/) (2024)
- [When Single-Agent with Skills Replace Multi-Agent Systems and When They Fail](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.04748/) (2026)
- [The Curse of CoT: On the Limitations of Chain-of-Thought in In-Context Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.05081/) (2025)
- [Chain-of-Thought Prompting Obscures Hallucination Cues in Large Language Models: An Empirical Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.17088/) (2025)
- [The SIFo Benchmark: Investigating the Sequential Instruction Following Ability of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.19999/) (2024)
- [LiRA: A Multi-Agent Framework for Reliable and Readable Literature Review Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.05138/) (2025)

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

- [The Wealth of Agents: Scaling Agentic AI Across Developers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.20518/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Recent progress in language modeling has largely relied on scaling model size, yet larger models do not reliably improve performance on tasks requiring multi-step reasoning and tool use. Multi-agent collaboration offers a potential alternative, raising a key question: can well-organized systems built from smaller models outperform much larger language models? We address this question using a minimally designed multi-agent system with a single orchestrator and a small set of specialized sub-agents with restricted communication. On tool-intensive benchmarks spanning factual retrieval, multi-hop reasoning, scientific question answering, and mathematical problem solving, we conduct controlled comparisons between small multi-agent systems and large single-agent models. We find that small multi-agent systems can outperform substantially larger single-agent models, even when the latter have direct access to tools. Reasoning at the orchestrator yields the largest gains, while enabling reasoning in sub-agents provides limited or negative benefits. Overall system performance is driven primarily by orchestrator capacity rather than sub-agent capacity. These results suggest that improved agentic performance depends more on architectural orchestration than on raw model scaling.