mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Semantic Register Compression in Multi-Agent LLM Cascades

arXiv 2607.14119 ↗First posted 12 May 2026cs.CLcited by 0

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Agent memory systems

Abstract (arXiv)

Multi-agent LLM systems commonly decompose complex tasks into specialized roles. However, this modularity introduces a representational risk: when intermediate agents transform text across linguistic registers, they can systematically compress the semantic distinctions needed for accurate downstream decisions. We term this phenomenon semantic register compression and characterize it as an observable failure mode in multi-agent cascades. Using a three-agent pipeline (Collector-Evaluator-Decider), we quantify compression via inter-label separation in sentence-transformer embedding space. Across political fact-checking (LIAR), sentiment analysis (SST-5), and medical triage (Triagegeist), critical evaluation reduces label separability at the Evaluator stage, while identity passthrough preserves it nearly fully. Five controlled variants show that geometric change depends on the specific intermediate transformation rather than on the mere presence of an additional cascade stage. A credibility-seeking variant expands rather than compresses inter-label separation, while shifting outputs toward mostly-true, demonstrating that transformation valence controls both the direction and the sign of geometric change independently of compression magnitude. Compression generalizes across the three domains with domain-dependent intensity (10.3% in fact-checking, 28.2% in sentiment, 9.1% in triage). A 20-level prompt gradient reveals a non-monotonic compression profile: balanced evaluative prompts produce the strongest compression, while extreme critical prompts show irregular moderate compression. These results demonstrate that semantic register compression is a measurable and generalizable phenomenon in multi-agent LLM systems, with implications for safety evaluation in high-stakes domains.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Agent memory systems, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 10 of its 12 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 12 May 2026.

Builds on

10 of 12 references.

References · 10

  1. 2019Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networkscited by 9,170
  2. 2023Improving Factuality and Reasoning in Language Models through Multiagent Debatecited by 1,784
  3. 2025Why Do Multi-Agent LLM Systems Fail?cited by 604
  4. 2017"Liar, Liar Pants on Fire": A New Benchmark Dataset for Fake News Detectioncited by 363
  5. 2026From Spark to Fire: Modeling and Mitigating Error Cascades in LLM-Based Multi-Agent Collaborationcited by 14
  6. 2026On the Reliability Limits of LLM-Based Multi-Agent Planningcited by 8
  7. 2026Latent Semantic Manifolds in Large Language Modelscited by 5
  8. 2026When Less Latent Leads to Better Relay: Information-Preserving Compression for Latent Multi-Agent LLM Collaborationcited by 5
  9. 2026Tracing the complexity profiles of different linguistic phenomena through the intrinsic dimension of LLM representationscited by 3
  10. 2026Asymptotic Semantic Collapse in Hierarchical Optimizationcited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Can Compressed LLMs Truly Act? An Empirical Evaluation of Agentic Capabilities in LLM Compression
  2. 2026AGORA: Adapter-Grounded Observation-Action Retention for Inference-Free Prompt Compression in LLM Agents
  3. 2026Cross-Modal Memory Compression for Efficient Multi-Agent Debate
  4. 2026Neural Router: Semantic Content Matching for Agentic AI
  5. 2026MemRefine: LLM-Guided Compression for Long-Term Agent Memory
  6. 2026Representational Collapse in Multi-Agent LLM Committees: Measurement and Diversity-Aware Consensus
  7. 2025An Information Theoretic Perspective on Agentic System Design
  8. 2025Emergent Convergence in Multi-Agent LLM Annotation