Bewaard in:
| Hoofdauteurs: | , , |
|---|---|
| Formaat: | Preprint |
| Gepubliceerd in: |
2025
|
| Onderwerpen: | |
| Online toegang: | https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.17536 |
| Tags: |
Voeg label toe
Geen labels, Wees de eerste die dit record labelt!
|
| _version_ | 1866914108713992192 |
|---|---|
| author | Choi, Hyeong Kyu Zhu, Xiaojin Li, Sharon |
| author_facet | Choi, Hyeong Kyu Zhu, Xiaojin Li, Sharon |
| contents | Multi-Agent Debate~(MAD) has emerged as a promising paradigm for improving the performance of large language models through collaborative reasoning. Despite recent advances, the key factors driving MAD's effectiveness remain unclear. In this work, we disentangle MAD into two key components--Majority Voting and inter-agent Debate--and assess their respective contributions. Through extensive experiments across seven NLP benchmarks, we find that Majority Voting alone accounts for most of the performance gains typically attributed to MAD. To explain this, we propose a theoretical framework that models debate as a stochastic process. We prove that it induces a martingale over agents' belief trajectories, implying that debate alone does not improve expected correctness. Guided by these insights, we demonstrate that targeted interventions, by biasing the belief update toward correction, can meaningfully enhance debate effectiveness. Overall, our findings suggest that while MAD has potential, simple ensembling methods remain strong and more reliable alternatives in many practical settings. Code is released in https://github.com/deeplearning-wisc/debate-or-vote. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2508_17536 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2025 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Debate or Vote: Which Yields Better Decisions in Multi-Agent Large Language Models? Choi, Hyeong Kyu Zhu, Xiaojin Li, Sharon Computation and Language Multiagent Systems Multi-Agent Debate~(MAD) has emerged as a promising paradigm for improving the performance of large language models through collaborative reasoning. Despite recent advances, the key factors driving MAD's effectiveness remain unclear. In this work, we disentangle MAD into two key components--Majority Voting and inter-agent Debate--and assess their respective contributions. Through extensive experiments across seven NLP benchmarks, we find that Majority Voting alone accounts for most of the performance gains typically attributed to MAD. To explain this, we propose a theoretical framework that models debate as a stochastic process. We prove that it induces a martingale over agents' belief trajectories, implying that debate alone does not improve expected correctness. Guided by these insights, we demonstrate that targeted interventions, by biasing the belief update toward correction, can meaningfully enhance debate effectiveness. Overall, our findings suggest that while MAD has potential, simple ensembling methods remain strong and more reliable alternatives in many practical settings. Code is released in https://github.com/deeplearning-wisc/debate-or-vote. |
| title | Debate or Vote: Which Yields Better Decisions in Multi-Agent Large Language Models? |
| topic | Computation and Language Multiagent Systems |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.17536 |