# A Communication-Theoretic Framework for LLM Agents: Cost-Aware Adaptive Reliability

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.09121 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.09121/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Reasoning for agents, planning and code, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 12 of its 59 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 9 May 2026.

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

## Builds on (most cited first, 12 of 12)

- [GPT-4 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.08774/) (2023)
- [Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.14168/) (2021)
- [Scaling Laws for Neural Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2001.08361/) (2020)
- [Language Models (Mostly) Know What They Know](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2207.05221/) (2022)
- [Harnessing Multiple Large Language Models: A Survey on LLM Ensemble](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.18036/) (2025)
- [Scaling Test-time Compute for LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.12928/) (2025)
- [Can You Trust LLM Judgments? Reliability of LLM-as-a-Judge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.12509/) (2024)
- [Rethinking Mixture-of-Agents: Is Mixing Different Large Language Models Beneficial?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.00674/) (2025)
- [Certified Self-Consistency: Statistical Guarantees and Test-Time Training for Reliable Reasoning in LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.17472/) (2025)
- [Don't Always Pick the Highest-Performing Model: An Information Theoretic View of LLM Ensemble Selection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.08003/) (2026)
- [Attention-MoA: Enhancing Mixture-of-Agents via Inter-Agent Semantic Attention and Deep Residual Synthesis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.16596/) (2026)
- [Test-Time Scaling Makes Overtraining Compute-Optimal](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.01411/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Agents built on large language models (LLMs) rely on a range of reliability techniques, including retry, majority voting, and self-consistency, that have been developed in parallel rather than within a common analytical framework. We observe that an LLM sampled at temperature T is a discrete stochastic channel p(y mid x) in the sense of Shannon's coding theory, and use this identity as the entry point for such a framework grounded in communication theory. Each of these techniques is a special case of one of six classical reliability operators: diversity combining, hybrid retransmission, iterative generator-critic decoding, rateless sampling, structured redundant verification, and difficulty-adaptive routing. Within the framework we give two closed-form results: a noise-variance threshold above which uniform averaging beats quality-weighted averaging, and a contractivity criterion for generator-critic refinement, consistent with a contractive-to-divergent transition we observe between 3B- and 14B-parameter models. We further introduce a cost-aware semantic-nearest-neighbor router whose single Lagrangian knob traverses the quality-cost frontier without retraining. Across six channel configurations spanning local and cloud models on 69 hard tasks, no fixed model-technique-budget choice dominates, motivating per-task allocation. On a 300-item hard split of MMLU, GSM8K, and HumanEval, our router occupies the full empirical Pareto frontier: at matched quality, its normalized cost is ≈56% lower than the strongest fixed technique; at matched normalized cost, it improves quality by ≈7% (26% over single-shot decoding). These results argue for consolidating these reliability techniques into a single tunable layer informed by channel coding.