arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2608.25937

Candidate supply and answer selection shape the value of LLM judging in multi-agent systems

Jia-Hao Ji·Sijie Li·Jiabei Cheng·Zixi She·Jin-Tai Yu·Zhiyuan Yuan
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Multi-agent systems (MAS) sometimes already have the potential to answer correctly, but still report a wrong answer. Explaining this outcome is difficult because generation, communication and final answer-selection rules usually change simultaneously. We conceptualize multi-agent reasoning as an evolutionary pipeline of candidate generation, peer communication and terminal selection, wherein consensus without quality control can exhibit patterns of memetic drift. We study two questions: (1) when an LLM judge provides effective selection pressure by supplying a signal of answer correctness for candidates generated in a multi-agent system, and (2) when using that signal improves the reported answer. To map judge reliability, we analysed 15,336 questions from MMLU-Pro, GPQA, MedXpertQA and MuSR, with Humanity's Last Exam analysed separately. To test these rules, we replayed 81,390 fixed candidate pools drawn from 16,278 questions across five benchmarks. We report three findings. (1) A correct answer is often already present among the generated candidates, but the system can still converge on and report a wrong answer. (2) Judge reliability is not a fixed trait of the model, but varies with the task, the generator and how rare the correct answer is. (3) Combining answer frequency with the judge's evaluation changed only the final answer-selection rule and raised accuracy from 63.82% to 70.82-70.95%, primarily by rescuing correct answers that were outnumbered by popular errors. In the systems studied here, the value of generating more candidates depends on whether those extra samples make correct answers present, frequent or recognisable. By isolating generation, recognition and selection, these findings establish a diagnostic basis for designing multi-agent architectures that protect generated correct answers from being lost.

Explore related subjects

cs.AIcs.MA

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Jia-Hao Ji, Sijie Li, Jiabei Cheng, Zixi She, Jin-Tai Yu, Zhiyuan Yuan. 2026-08-30. Candidate supply and answer selection shape the value of LLM judging in multi-agent systems. https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.25937

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

cs.AI subjectcs.MA subject

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

MAS-on-the-Fly: In-Context Structural Adaptation of LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems

Large Language Model (LLM)-based multi-agent systems (MAS) have emerged as a promising paradigm for complex tasks. However, existing works often rely on manual designs or "one-size-fits-all" automation and lack adaptability after deployment. We study in-context structural adaptation, where structured experience conditions both query-dependent system generation and execution-time reconfiguration without updating LLM parameters. We introduce MASFly, which realizes this adaptation through two complementary mechanisms. First, a retrieval-augmented SOP instantiation mechanism retrieves and adapts successful collaboration patterns to construct a query-specific MAS. Second, an experience-enhanced process supervision mechanism uses a dedicated Watcher agent to monitor execution against prior failure experience and reconfigure the system upon abnormal behavior. Experiments demonstrate that MASFly achieves state-ofthe-art performance, including a 61.7% success rate on TravelPlanner, with strong task adaptability and robustness.

cs.MA↗
arXiv2026

MAS-ProVe: Understanding the Process Verification of Multi-Agent Systems

Multi-Agent Systems (MAS) built on Large Language Models (LLMs) often exhibit high variance in their reasoning trajectories. Process verification, which evaluates intermediate steps in trajectories, has shown promise in general reasoning settings, and has been suggested as a potential tool for guiding coordination of MAS; however, its actual effectiveness in MAS remains unclear. To fill this gap, we present MAS-ProVe, a systematic empirical study of process verification for multi-agent systems (MAS). Our study spans three verification paradigms (LLM-as-a-Judge, reward models, and process reward models), evaluated across two levels of verification granularity (agent-level and iteration-level). We further examine five representative verifiers and four context management strategies, and conduct experiments over six diverse MAS frameworks on multiple reasoning benchmarks. We find that process-level verification does not consistently improve performance and frequently exhibits high variance, highlighting the difficulty of reliably evaluating partial multi-agent trajectories. Among the methods studied, LLM-as-a-Judge generally outperforms reward-based approaches, with trained judges surpassing general-purpose LLMs. We further observe a small performance gap between LLMs acting as judges and as single agents, and identify a context-length-performance trade-off in verification. Overall, our results suggest that effective and robust process verification for MAS remains an open challenge, requiring further advances beyond current paradigms. Code is available at https://github.com/Wang-ML-Lab/MAS-ProVe.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2026

FRAC-MAS: A Safe and Explainable Multi-Agent System for Fracture Diagnosis

Fracture detection and its clinical interpretability see notable improvements when deep vision models are integrated with agentic AI architectures. While deep learning models achieve high diagnostic performance, their black-box nature limits clinical adoption. We propose FRAC-MAS, an agentic AI system for automated, explainable, and safe bone fracture detection. The framework combines a stacked ensemble of four vision models with conformal prediction to produce statistically grounded differential diagnoses, while a multi-agent workflow performs independent verification, retrieves clinical guidelines, and generates patient-friendly reports. A pipeline-depth ablation study confirms that our multi-agent critic triages 86.6% of cases into a high-confidence auto-confirmed cohort while escalating uncertain cases, outperforming a single-agent baseline. Patient preference studies against Llama, MedGemma, and Gemini further demonstrate significantly more comprehensible clinical reports. These results suggest that integrating multi-agent critics with conformal guarantees enables safer radiology triage while preserving clinician oversight. More broadly, FRAC-MAS demonstrates how cooperative agentic architectures can serve as auditable, human-in-the-loop decision support systems for safety-critical healthcare. Our code is available at https://github.com/hardik1712/FRAC-MAS, and the website is available at https://frac-mas.vercel.app.

cs.AI↗