mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

ECMR: Evidence-Aware Deliberation Control for Multi-Agent LLM Reasoning

arXiv 2610.17869 ↗First posted 13 Oct 2026cs.AI cs.MAcited by 0

On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning for agents, planning and code

also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)

Multi-agent Large Language Model (LLM) systems typically commit to a deliberation protocol before inference. A fixed protocol cannot allocate computation differently to resolved and unresolved instances, and it may mistake repeated support for independent confirmation. We study this failure as semantic false consensus: a confident group answer supported by narrow, duplicated, or correlated rationales. We introduce ECMR, an evidence-aware controller over frozen role-conditioned LLMs. At each step, ECMR summarizes answer concentration, support diversity and independence, contradictions, role behavior, verification history, and remaining budget, then selects whether to propose, challenge, verify, arbitrate, diversify, correct a role, or stop. We formulate this decision as finite-horizon budgeted control and derive sufficient conditions under which state conditioning, risk-triggered verification, and role correction improve cost-adjusted utility. Across a declared held-out evaluation of 9,000 records from MedQA, CaseHOLD, and FinQA, ECMR-Full increases pooled accuracy from 62.1% to 84.9%, reduces false-consensus rate from 40.7% to 17.0%, and raises evidence-support rate from 58.0% to 88.7%. State shuffling loses 11.7 accuracy points with only 0.7 fewer rounds, while harder traces shift from early stopping toward arbitration. ECMR-Full uses the largest token budget, yielding the strongest absolute reliability rather than uniformly superior token efficiency.

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 22 of its 24 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 13 Oct 2026.

Builds on

22 of 24 references.

Closest ancestors · 3

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2024Improving Multi-Agent Debate with Sparse Communication Topology17 Jun
  2. 2023ReConcile: Round-Table Conference Improves Reasoning via Consensus among Diverse LLMs22 Sep
  3. 2023Encouraging Divergent Thinking in Large Language Models through Multi-Agent Debate30 May

Other references · 19

  1. 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,459
  2. 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,695
  3. 2022Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Modelscited by 5,708
  4. 2023Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learningcited by 4,276
  5. 2023Toolformer: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Use Toolscited by 4,182
  6. 2023Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-Feedbackcited by 3,442
  7. 2023Tree of Thoughts: Deliberate Problem Solving with Large Language Modelscited by 3,211
  8. 2023G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignmentcited by 2,276
  9. 2023A Survey on Large Language Model based Autonomous Agentscited by 2,242
  10. 2020What Disease does this Patient Have? A Large-scale Open Domain Question Answering Dataset from Medical Examscited by 1,356
  11. 2022Program of Thoughts Prompting: Disentangling Computation from Reasoning for Numerical Reasoning Taskscited by 1,076
  12. 2023ChatDev: Communicative Agents for Software Developmentcited by 919
7 more
  1. 2023FrugalGPT: How to Use Large Language Models While Reducing Cost and Improving Performancecited by 853
  2. 2023LLM-Blender: Ensembling Large Language Models with Pairwise Ranking and Generative Fusioncited by 564
  3. 2021FinQA: A Dataset of Numerical Reasoning over Financial Datacited by 562
  4. 2023MedAgents: Large Language Models as Collaborators for Zero-shot Medical Reasoningcited by 316
  5. 2023AutoAgents: A Framework for Automatic Agent Generationcited by 216
  6. 2021When Does Pretraining Help? Assessing Self-Supervised Learning for Law and the CaseHOLD Datasetcited by 201
  7. 2023Can ChatGPT Defend its Belief in Truth? Evaluating LLM Reasoning via Debatecited by 94

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Systematic Failures in Collective Reasoning under Distributed Information in Multi-Agent LLMs
  2. 2025Adaptive Reasoning Executor: A Collaborative Agent System for Efficient Reasoning
  3. 2026Consilience: Conformally Calibrated Communication Control for Hidden-Profile Multi-Agent Reasoning
  4. 2025Debate Only When Necessary: Adaptive Multiagent Collaboration for Efficient LLM Reasoning
  5. 2026LLM Agents for Deliberative Collaboration: A Study on Joint Decision Making Under Partial Observability
  6. 2025Multi-Agent Collaborative Intelligence: Dual-Dial Control for Reliable LLM Reasoning
  7. 2025Adaptive Coopetition: Leveraging Coarse Verifier Signals for Resilient Multi-Agent LLM Reasoning
  8. 2026A Comprehensive Evaluation of LLM Reasoning: From Single-Model to Multi-Agent Paradigms