How Task Structure Limits Multi-Agent Success: An Information-Theoretic Analysis
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Multi-agent systems (MAS) were expected to overcome the limitation of single-agent systems (SAS) through collaboration. However, under typicality conditions on the task's constraint graph and bounded inter-agent communication, we prove that the success probability of a MAS is closely tied to the connectivity of task constraints, where each agent has limited information-processing capacity. Specifically, the success probability decays exponentially with an information bottleneck that emerges from partitioning the task's constraint graph among agents. We define this quantity as the minimum cut cost Cmin of the potential constraint graph of each task. This information-theoretic bound applies to both open systems with external feedback and closed systems without. We validate our theory on both synthetic experiments and real-world empirical data from SWE-bench submissions. From our framework, effective MAS design should incorporate task-inherent constraints alongside engineering optimization, and when Cmin is high, practitioners should restructure tasks rather than simply scaling agents or communication.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 30 of its 53 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 Jun 2026.
Builds on
30 of 53 references.
References · 30
- 2023Lost in the Middle: How Language Models Use Long Contextscited by 3,455
- 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,373
- 2023AutoGen: Enabling Next-Gen LLM Applications via Multi-Agent Conversationcited by 1,988
- 2023MetaGPT: Meta Programming for A Multi-Agent Collaborative Frameworkcited by 1,808
- 2023Improving Factuality and Reasoning in Language Models through Multiagent Debatecited by 1,784
- 2024The AI Scientist: Towards Fully Automated Open-Ended Scientific Discoverycited by 1,071
- 2023ChatDev: Communicative Agents for Software Developmentcited by 919
- 2024Large Language Model based Multi-Agents: A Survey of Progress and Challengescited by 769
- 2025Why Do Multi-Agent LLM Systems Fail?cited by 604
- 2023AgentVerse: Facilitating Multi-Agent Collaboration and Exploring Emergent Behaviorscited by 598
- 2025Multi-Agent Collaboration Mechanisms: A Survey of LLMscited by 431
- 2024AutoCodeRover: Autonomous Program Improvementcited by 278
18 more
- 2024Scaling Large Language Model-based Multi-Agent Collaborationcited by 241
- 2023PromptAgent: Strategic Planning with Language Models Enables Expert-level Prompt Optimizationcited by 233
- 2024Chain of Agents: Large Language Models Collaborating on Long-Context Taskscited by 206
- 2024Rethinking the Bounds of LLM Reasoning: Are Multi-Agent Discussions the Key?cited by 159
- 2023TaskBench: Benchmarking Large Language Models for Task Automationcited by 144
- 2024Cut the Crap: An Economical Communication Pipeline for LLM-based Multi-Agent Systemscited by 141
- 2025Towards a Science of Scaling Agent Systemscited by 138
- 2025Context Length Alone Hurts LLM Performance Despite Perfect Retrievalcited by 127
- 2023Scalable Multi-Robot Collaboration with Large Language Models: Centralized or Decentralized Systems?cited by 106
- 2025AgentNet: Decentralized Evolutionary Coordination for LLM-based Multi-Agent Systemscited by 90
- 2025Flow: Modularized Agentic Workflow Automationcited by 34
- 2026Rethinking the Value of Multi-Agent Workflow: A Strong Single Agent Baselinecited by 22
- 2025Unable to Forget: Proactive Interference Reveals Working Memory Limits in LLMs Beyond Context Lengthcited by 20
- 2022Multi-Agent Coordination via Multi-Level Communicationcited by 14
- 2025Lost in Transmission: When and Why LLMs Fail to Reason Globallycited by 9
- 2016On the Distributed Complexity of Large-Scale Graph Computationscited by 2
- 2025Distributed Information Bottleneck Theory for Multi-Modal Task-Aware Semantic Communicationcited by 1
- 2025Communication to Completion: Modeling Collaborative Workflows with Intelligent Multi-Agent Communicationcited by 1
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.