mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Adaptive Influence Graphs for Failure Attribution in Multi-Agent Systems

arXiv 2608.24361 ↗First posted 25 Aug 2026cs.AIcited by 1

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Software engineering coding agents

Abstract (arXiv)

Multi-agent LLM systems are increasingly deployed in real-world applications, where failures can be costly and difficult to localize. Despite growing efforts to automate failure attribution, diagnosing failed runs still largely relies on human engineers. Yet engineers rarely debug complex systems by reading raw logs end to end. Instead, observability tools organize traces around components, actions, and dependencies to support targeted navigation. We hypothesize that modern LLMs can benefit from the same paradigm. To test this hypothesis, we introduce Adaptive Influence Graphs (AIGs), a two-stage agentic framework that first transforms a failed trace into a structured graph and then navigates it to identify the critical error. Across multiple models, we show that richer trace representations consistently improve failure attribution, with adaptive graph construction and agent-directed traversal yielding the strongest results. AIGs establish a new state of the art on Who&When, the standard benchmark for multi-agent failure attribution. This affirms our hypothesis that attribution depends not only on the diagnosing model, but also on how the trace is represented and explored.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Software engineering coding agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 13 of its 23 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 Aug 2026.

Builds on

13 of 23 references.

Closest ancestors · 8

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2026Knowledge-Based Zero-Replay Debugging of Multi-Agent LLM Traces11 Jun
  2. 2026From Failed Trajectories to Reliable LLM Agents: Diagnosing and Repairing Harness Flaws4 Jun
  3. 2026FALAT: Tracing Failures in LLM Agent Trajectories via Dependency-Guided Search30 May
  4. 2026MASPrism: Lightweight Failure Attribution for Multi-Agent Systems Using Prefill-Stage Signals8 May
  5. 2026Rethinking Failure Attribution in Multi-Agent Systems: A Multi-Perspective Benchmark and Evaluation26 Mar
  6. 2025Where Did It All Go Wrong? A Hierarchical Look into Multi-Agent Error Attribution6 Oct
  7. 2025Who is Introducing the Failure? Automatically Attributing Failures of Multi-Agent Systems via Spectrum Analysis17 Sep
  8. 2025AgenTracer: Who Is Inducing Failure in the LLM Agentic Systems?3 Sep

Other references · 5

  1. 2023Lost in the Middle: How Language Models Use Long Contextscited by 3,455
  2. 2023Quantifying Language Models' Sensitivity to Spurious Features in Prompt Design or: How I learned to start worrying about prompt formattingcited by 817
  3. 2025RAFFLES: Reasoning-based Attribution of Faults for LLM Systemscited by 21
  4. 2025Automatic Failure Attribution and Critical Step Prediction Method for Multi-Agent Systems Based on Causal Inferencecited by 18
  5. 2024Distance between Relevant Information Pieces Causes Bias in Long-Context LLMscited by 16

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Seeing the Whole Elephant: A Benchmark for Failure Attribution in LLM-based Multi-Agent Systems
  2. 2025Which Agent Causes Task Failures and When? On Automated Failure Attribution of LLM Multi-Agent Systems
  3. 2026Error-Propagation Modeling for Failure Attribution in LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems
  4. 2026From Flat Logs to Causal Graphs: Hierarchical Failure Attribution for LLM-based Multi-Agent Systems
  5. 2026VerifyMAS: Hypothesis Verification for Failure Attribution in LLM Multi-Agent Systems
  6. 2026Who&When Pro: Can LLMs Really Attribute Failures in AI Agents?
  7. 2026StepFinder: A Temporal Semantic Framework for Failure Attribution in Multi-Agent Systems
  8. 2026DeFA: Dependency-Guided Failure Attribution for LLM Agents