MAS-ProVe: Understanding the Process Verification of Multi-Agent Systems
On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning for agents, planning and code
also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)
Multi-Agent Systems (MAS) built on Large Language Models (LLMs) often exhibit high variance in their reasoning trajectories. Process verification, which evaluates intermediate steps in trajectories, has shown promise in general reasoning settings, and has been suggested as a potential tool for guiding coordination of MAS; however, its actual effectiveness in MAS remains unclear. To fill this gap, we present MAS-ProVe, a systematic empirical study of process verification for multi-agent systems (MAS). Our study spans three verification paradigms (LLM-as-a-Judge, reward models, and process reward models), evaluated across two levels of verification granularity (agent-level and iteration-level). We further examine five representative verifiers and four context management strategies, and conduct experiments over six diverse MAS frameworks on multiple reasoning benchmarks. We find that process-level verification does not consistently improve performance and frequently exhibits high variance, highlighting the difficulty of reliably evaluating partial multi-agent trajectories. Among the methods studied, LLM-as-a-Judge generally outperforms reward-based approaches, with trained judges surpassing general-purpose LLMs. We further observe a small performance gap between LLMs acting as judges and as single agents, and identify a context-length-performance trade-off in verification. Overall, our results suggest that effective and robust process verification for MAS remains an open challenge, requiring further advances beyond current paradigms. Code is available at https://github.com/Wang-ML-Lab/MAS-ProVe.
Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning for agents, planning and code, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 24 of its 29 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 Feb 2026.
Builds on
24 of 29 references.
Closest ancestors · 3
Same direction, newest first
- 2025Two Heads are Better Than One: Test-time Scaling of Multi-agent Collaborative Reasoning14 Apr
- 2024AFlow: Automating Agentic Workflow Generation14 Oct
- 2023Encouraging Divergent Thinking in Large Language Models through Multi-Agent Debate30 May
Other references · 21
- 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,053
- 2023Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learningcited by 4,064
- 2023GPQA: A Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A Benchmarkcited by 2,748
- 2023Improving Factuality and Reasoning in Language Models through Multiagent Debatecited by 1,739
- 2025gpt-oss-120b & gpt-oss-20b Model Cardcited by 1,258
- 2023GAIA: a benchmark for General AI Assistantscited by 1,084
- 2024Large Language Monkeys: Scaling Inference Compute with Repeated Samplingcited by 946
- 2023AgentVerse: Facilitating Multi-Agent Collaboration and Exploring Emergent Behaviorscited by 580
- 2025The Lessons of Developing Process Reward Models in Mathematical Reasoningcited by 402
- 2024Automated Design of Agentic Systemscited by 360
- 2023A Dynamic LLM-Powered Agent Network for Task-Oriented Agent Collaborationcited by 281
- 2025Skywork-Reward-V2: Scaling Preference Data Curation via Human-AI Synergycited by 204
9 more
- 2025Can 1B LLM Surpass 405B LLM? Rethinking Compute-Optimal Test-Time Scalingcited by 135
- 2025Multi-Agent Design: Optimizing Agents with Better Prompts and Topologiescited by 106
- 2025DeepSeekMath-V2: Towards Self-Verifiable Mathematical Reasoningcited by 84
- 2025No Free Labels: Limitations of LLM-as-a-Judge Without Human Groundingcited by 50
- 2025Evaluating Judges as Evaluators: The JETTS Benchmark of LLM-as-Judges as Test-Time Scaling Evaluatorscited by 42
- 2025Do LLM Evaluators Prefer Themselves for a Reason?cited by 38
- 2025MAS-ZERO: Designing Multi-Agent Systems with Zero Supervisioncited by 26
- 2026MAS-Orchestra: Understanding and Improving Multi-Agent Reasoning Through Holistic Orchestration and Controlled Benchmarkscited by 26
- 2025Foundational Automatic Evaluators: Scaling Multi-Task Generative Evaluator Training for Reasoning-Centric Domainscited by 5
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 5.
5 papers.
- 2026Effective Strategies for Asynchronous Software Engineering Agentscited by 12
- 2026The Illusion of Multi-Agent Advantagecited by 4
- 2026Reward Modeling for Multi-Agent Orchestrationcited by 1
- 2026Scaling LLM-Driven Multi-Agent Systems: Design Principles and Architectural Scalability Analysiscited by 0
- 2026Enhancing Human Mobility Prediction with Spatially Aware LLM-based Multi-Agent Systemscited by 0
- 2026Enhancing Human Mobility Prediction with Spatially Aware LLM-based Multi-Agent Systems13 Sep 2026
- 2026Scaling LLM-Driven Multi-Agent Systems: Design Principles and Architectural Scalability Analysis30 Jul 2026
- 2026Reward Modeling for Multi-Agent Orchestration11 Jun 2026
- 2026The Illusion of Multi-Agent Advantage11 Jun 2026
- 2026Effective Strategies for Asynchronous Software Engineering Agents23 Mar 2026
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026VerifyMAS: Hypothesis Verification for Failure Attribution in LLM Multi-Agent Systems
- 2026MAS-FIRE: Fault Injection and Reliability Evaluation for LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems
- 2026Decentralized Multi-Agent Systems with Shared Context
- 2026Single-Agent LLMs Outperform Multi-Agent Systems on Multi-Hop Reasoning Under Equal Thinking Token Budgets
- 2026A Comprehensive Evaluation of LLM Reasoning: From Single-Model to Multi-Agent Paradigms
- 2026MASBench: Benchmarking LLM-based Multi-Agent Collaboration under Partial Observability
- 2025Verification-Aware Planning for Multi-Agent Systems
- 2026DIANOIA: Diagnostic Decomposition and Joint Optimization for Multi-Agent Reasoning