Error-Propagation Modeling for Failure Attribution in LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Software engineering coding agents also fits: General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks
Abstract (arXiv)
LLM-based multi-agent systems (MASs) are increasingly used to solve complex tasks through coordinated reasoning, tool use, and interaction with external resources. However, attributing failures in such systems remains challenging because the observed outcome often does not directly reveal the error responsible for the failed execution. In this work, the attribution target is the decisive error, defined as the agent--step pair whose correction would recover the failed execution. Existing approaches largely identify suspicious steps without explicitly modeling how errors propagate across interactions or persist in unresolved loops, making decisive errors difficult to distinguish from downstream failure symptoms. We propose Error-Propagation Modeling for Failure Attribution (EMFA). EMFA constructs a structured representation of the failed trajectory, models both cascading propagation and persistent interaction loops, and uses propagation-aware candidate screening followed by counterfactual verification to identify the decisive agent--step pair. On the Who&When benchmark, EMFA achieves state-of-the-art step-level attribution accuracy and remains competitive at the agent level. It improves the previous best step-level results by 3.45 and 4.40 percentage points on the Hand-Crafted and Algorithm-Generated subsets, respectively.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Software engineering coding agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 11 of its 20 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Oct 2026.
Builds on
11 of 20 references.
Closest ancestors · 7
Same direction, newest first
- 2026From Flat Logs to Causal Graphs: Hierarchical Failure Attribution for LLM-based Multi-Agent Systems27 Feb
- 2025Where Did It All Go Wrong? A Hierarchical Look into Multi-Agent Error Attribution6 Oct
- 2025Which Agent Causes Task Failures and When? On Automated Failure Attribution of LLM Multi-Agent Systems30 Apr
- 2025Why Do Multi-Agent LLM Systems Fail?17 Mar
- 2024AFlow: Automating Agentic Workflow Generation14 Oct
- 2024HyperAgent: Generalist Software Engineering Agents to Solve Coding Tasks at Scale9 Sep
- 2023ChatDev: Communicative Agents for Software Development16 Jul
Other references · 4
- 2023GAIA: a benchmark for General AI Assistantscited by 1,128
- 2024Magentic-One: A Generalist Multi-Agent System for Solving Complex Taskscited by 232
- 2024AssistantBench: Can Web Agents Solve Realistic and Time-Consuming Tasks?cited by 158
- 2024Adaptive In-conversation Team Building for Language Model Agentscited by 39
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026VerifyMAS: Hypothesis Verification for Failure Attribution in LLM Multi-Agent Systems
- 2026Seeing the Whole Elephant: A Benchmark for Failure Attribution in LLM-based Multi-Agent Systems
- 2026Adaptive Influence Graphs for Failure Attribution in Multi-Agent Systems
- 2026StepFinder: A Temporal Semantic Framework for Failure Attribution in Multi-Agent Systems
- 2026Rethinking Failure Attribution in Multi-Agent Systems: A Multi-Perspective Benchmark and Evaluation
- 2026DeFA: Dependency-Guided Failure Attribution for LLM Agents
- 2026FALAT: Tracing Failures in LLM Agent Trajectories via Dependency-Guided Search
- 2026Can Failed Trajectories Reveal Where Agents Go Wrong? Agentic Failure Attribution Without Step-Level Labels