Effective human-AI collaboration hinges not only on the AI agent's ability to follow explicit instructions but also on its capacity to navigate ambiguity, incompleteness, invalidity, and irrelevance in communication. Gricean conversational and inference norms facilitate collaboration by aligning unclear instructions with cooperative principles. We propose a normative framework that integrates Gricean norms and cognitive frameworks -- common ground, relevance theory, and theory of mind -- into large language model (LLM) based agents. The normative framework adopts the Gricean maxims of quantity, quality, relation, and manner, along with inference, as Gricean norms to interpret unclear instructions, which are: ambiguous, incomplete, invalid, or irrelevant. Within this framework, we introduce Lamoids, GPT-4 powered agents designed to collaborate with humans. To assess the influence of Gricean norms in human-AI collaboration, we evaluate two versions of a Lamoid: one with norms and one without. In our experiments, a Lamoid collaborates with a human to achieve shared goals in a grid world (Doors, Keys, and Gems) by interpreting both clear and unclear natural language instructions. Our results reveal that the Lamoid with Gricean norms achieves higher task accuracy and generates clearer, more accurate, and contextually relevant responses than the Lamoid without norms. This improvement stems from the normative framework, which enhances the agent's pragmatic reasoning, fostering effective human-AI collaboration and enabling context-aware communication in LLM-based agents.
Recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) have enabled researchers to focus on practical repository-level tasks in software engineering domain. In this work, we consider a cornerstone task for automating work with software repositories-environment setup, i.e., a task of configuring a repository-specific development environment on a system. Existing studies on environment setup introduce innovative agentic strategies, but their evaluation is often based on small datasets that may not capture the full range of configuration challenges encountered in practice. To address this gap, we introduce a comprehensive environment setup benchmark EnvBench. It encompasses 329 Python and 665 JVM-based (Java, Kotlin) repositories, with a focus on repositories that present genuine configuration challenges, excluding projects that can be fully configured by simple deterministic scripts. To enable further benchmark extension and usage for model tuning, we implement two automatic metrics: a static analysis check for missing imports in Python and a compilation check for JVM languages. We demonstrate the applicability of our benchmark by evaluating three environment setup approaches, including a simple zero-shot baseline and two agentic workflows, that we test with two powerful LLM backbones, GPT-4o and GPT-4o-mini. The best approach manages to successfully configure 6.69% repositories for Python and 29.47% repositories for JVM, suggesting that EnvBench remains challenging for current approaches. Our benchmark suite is publicly available at https://github.com/JetBrains-Research/EnvBench. The dataset and experiment trajectories are available at https://jb.gg/envbench.
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly integrated with specialized external tools, yet many tasks demand zero-shot tool usage with minimal or noisy documentation. Existing solutions rely on manual rewriting or labeled data for validation, making them inapplicable in true zero-shot settings. To address these challenges, we propose PLAY2PROMPT, an automated framework that systematically "plays" with each tool to explore its input-output behaviors. Through this iterative trial-and-error process, PLAY2PROMPT refines tool documentation and generates usage examples without any labeled data. These examples not only guide LLM inference but also serve as validation to further enhance tool utilization. Extensive experiments on real-world tasks demonstrate that PLAY2PROMPT significantly improves zero-shot tool performance across both open and closed models, offering a scalable and effective solution for domain-specific tool integration.
Maintaining and scaling software systems relies heavily on effective code refactoring, yet this process remains labor-intensive, requiring developers to carefully analyze existing codebases and prevent the introduction of new defects. Although recent advancements have leveraged Large Language Models (LLMs) to automate refactoring tasks, current solutions are constrained in scope and lack mechanisms to guarantee code compilability and successful test execution. In this work, we introduce MANTRA, a comprehensive LLM agent-based framework that automates method-level refactoring. MANTRA integrates Context-Aware Retrieval-Augmented Generation, coordinated Multi-Agent Collaboration, and Verbal Reinforcement Learning to emulate human decision-making during refactoring while preserving code correctness and readability. Our empirical study, conducted on 703 instances of "pure refactorings" (i.e., code changes exclusively involving structural improvements), drawn from 10 representative Java projects, covers the six most prevalent refactoring operations. Experimental results demonstrate that MANTRA substantially surpasses a baseline LLM model (RawGPT ), achieving an 82.8% success rate (582/703) in producing code that compiles and passes all tests, compared to just 8.7% (61/703) with RawGPT. Moreover, in comparison to IntelliJ's LLM-powered refactoring tool (EM-Assist), MANTRA exhibits a 50% improvement in generating Extract Method transformations. A usability study involving 37 professional developers further shows that refactorings performed by MANTRA are perceived to be as readable and reusable as human-written code, and in certain cases, even more favorable. These results highlight the practical advantages of MANTRA and emphasize the growing potential of LLM-based systems in advancing the automation of software refactoring tasks.
Large Language Models (LLMs) have revolutionized various domains, including natural language processing, data analysis, and software development, by enabling automation. In software engineering, LLM-powered coding agents have garnered significant attention due to their potential to automate complex development tasks, assist in debugging, and enhance productivity. However, existing approaches often struggle with sub-optimal decision-making, requiring either extensive manual intervention or inefficient compute scaling strategies. To improve coding agent performance, we present Dynamic Action Re-Sampling (DARS), a novel inference time compute scaling approach for coding agents, that is faster and more effective at recovering from sub-optimal decisions compared to baselines. While traditional agents either follow linear trajectories or rely on random sampling for scaling compute, our approach DARS works by branching out a trajectory at certain key decision points by taking an alternative action given the history of the trajectory and execution feedback of the previous attempt from that point. We evaluate our approach on SWE-Bench Lite benchmark, demonstrating that this scaling strategy achieves a pass@k score of 55% with Claude 3.5 Sonnet V2. Our framework achieves a pass@1 rate of 47%, outperforming state-of-the-art (SOTA) open-source frameworks.
Group decision-making processes frequently suffer when social influence and power dynamics suppress minority viewpoints, leading to compliance and groupthink. Conversational agents can counteract these harmful dynamics by encouraging critical thinking. This study investigates how LLM-powered devil's advocate systems affect psychological safety, opinion expression, and satisfaction in power-imbalanced group dynamics. We conducted an experiment with 48 participants in 12 four-person groups, each containing three high-power (senior) and one low-power (junior) member. Each group completed decision tasks in both baseline and AI intervention conditions. Results show AI counterarguments fostered a more flexible atmosphere and significantly enhanced both process and outcome satisfaction for all participants, with particularly notable improvements for minority members. Cognitive workload increased slightly, though not significantly. This research contributes empirical evidence on how AI systems can effectively navigate power hierarchies to foster more inclusive decision-making environments, highlighting the importance of balancing intervention frequency, maintaining conversational flow, and preserving group cohesion.
A Barrier-Free GeoQA Portal: Enhancing Geospatial Data Accessibility with a Multi-Agent LLM Framework Geoportals are vital for accessing and analyzing geospatial data, promoting open spatial data sharing and online geo-information management. Designed with GIS-like interaction and layered visualization, they often challenge non-expert users with complex functionalities and overlapping layers that obscure spatial relationships. We propose a GeoQA Portal using a multi-agent Large Language Model framework for seamless natural language interaction with geospatial data. Complex queries are broken into subtasks handled by specialized agents, retrieving relevant geographic data efficiently. Task plans are shown to users, boosting transparency. The portal supports default and custom data inputs for flexibility. Semantic search via word vector similarity aids data retrieval despite imperfect terms. Case studies, evaluations, and user tests confirm its effectiveness for non-experts, bridging GIS complexity and public access, and offering an intuitive solution for future geoportals.
Large Language Models (LLMs) have exhibited impressive capabilities across numerous domains, yet they often struggle with complex reasoning and decision-making tasks. Decision-making games, which inherently require multifaceted reasoning logic, serve as ideal sandboxes for evaluating and enhancing the reasoning abilities of LLMs. In this work, we first explore whether LLMs can master complex decision-making games through targeted post-training. To this end, we design data synthesis strategies and curate extensive offline datasets from two classic games, Doudizhu and Go. We further develop a suite of techniques to effectively incorporate this data into LLM training, resulting in two novel agents: Mastermind-Dou and Mastermind-Go. Our experimental results demonstrate that these Mastermind LLMs achieve competitive performance in their respective games. Additionally, we explore whether integrating decision-making data can enhance the general reasoning abilities of LLMs. Our findings suggest that such post-training improves certain aspects of reasoning, providing valuable insights for optimizing LLM data collection and synthesis strategies.
The aspiration of the Vision-and-Language Navigation (VLN) task has long been to develop an embodied agent with robust adaptability, capable of seamlessly transferring its navigation capabilities across various tasks. Despite remarkable advancements in recent years, most methods necessitate dataset-specific training, thereby lacking the capability to generalize across diverse datasets encompassing distinct types of instructions. Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated exceptional reasoning and generalization abilities, exhibiting immense potential in robot action planning. In this paper, we propose FlexVLN, an innovative hierarchical approach to VLN that integrates the fundamental navigation ability of a supervised-learning-based Instruction Follower with the robust generalization ability of the LLM Planner, enabling effective generalization across diverse VLN datasets. Moreover, a verification mechanism and a multi-model integration mechanism are proposed to mitigate potential hallucinations by the LLM Planner and enhance execution accuracy of the Instruction Follower. We take REVERIE, SOON, and CVDN-target as out-of-domain datasets for assessing generalization ability. The generalization performance of FlexVLN surpasses that of all the previous methods to a large extent.
Document Question Answering (DocQA) is a very common task. Existing methods using Large Language Models (LLMs) or Large Vision Language Models (LVLMs) and Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) often prioritize information from a single modal, failing to effectively integrate textual and visual cues. These approaches struggle with complex multi-modal reasoning, limiting their performance on real-world documents. We present MDocAgent (A Multi-Modal Multi-Agent Framework for Document Understanding), a novel RAG and multi-agent framework that leverages both text and image. Our system employs five specialized agents: a general agent, a critical agent, a text agent, an image agent and a summarizing agent. These agents engage in multi-modal context retrieval, combining their individual insights to achieve a more comprehensive understanding of the document's content. This collaborative approach enables the system to synthesize information from both textual and visual components, leading to improved accuracy in question answering. Preliminary experiments on five benchmarks like MMLongBench, LongDocURL demonstrate the effectiveness of our MDocAgent, achieve an average improvement of 12.1% compared to current state-of-the-art method. This work contributes to the development of more robust and comprehensive DocQA systems capable of handling the complexities of real-world documents containing rich textual and visual information. Our data and code are available at https://github.com/aiming-lab/MDocAgent.
While human cognition inherently retrieves information from diverse and specialized knowledge sources during decision-making processes, current Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems typically operate through single-source knowledge retrieval, leading to a cognitive-algorithmic discrepancy. To bridge this gap, we introduce MoK-RAG, a novel multi-source RAG framework that implements a mixture of knowledge paths enhanced retrieval mechanism through functional partitioning of a large language model (LLM) corpus into distinct sections, enabling retrieval from multiple specialized knowledge paths. Applied to the generation of 3D simulated environments, our proposed MoK-RAG3D enhances this paradigm by partitioning 3D assets into distinct sections and organizing them based on a hierarchical knowledge tree structure. Different from previous methods that only use manual evaluation, we pioneered the introduction of automated evaluation methods for 3D scenes. Both automatic and human evaluations in our experiments demonstrate that MoK-RAG3D can assist Embodied AI agents in generating diverse scenes.
Large Language Models (LLMs) have made significant progress in various fields. However, challenges remain in Multi-Disciplinary Team (MDT) medical consultations. Current research enhances reasoning through role assignment, task decomposition, and accumulation of medical experience. Multi-role collaboration in MDT consultations often results in excessively long dialogue histories. This increases the model's cognitive burden and degrades both efficiency and accuracy. Some methods only store treatment histories. They do not extract effective experience or reflect on errors. This limits knowledge generalization and system evolution. We propose a multi-agent MDT medical consultation framework based on LLMs to address these issues. Our framework uses consensus aggregation and a residual discussion structure for multi-round consultations. It also employs a Correct Answer Knowledge Base (CorrectKB) and a Chain-of-Thought Knowledge Base (ChainKB) to accumulate consultation experience. These mechanisms enable the framework to evolve and continually improve diagnosis rationality and accuracy. Experimental results on the MedQA and PubMedQA datasets demonstrate that our framework achieves accuracies of 90.1% and 83.9%, respectively, and that the constructed knowledge bases generalize effectively across test sets from both datasets.
Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as powerful tools for software development tasks such as code completion, translation, and optimization. However, their ability to generate efficient and correct code, particularly in complex High-Performance Computing (HPC) contexts, has remained underexplored. To address this gap, this paper presents a comprehensive benchmark suite encompassing multiple critical HPC computational motifs to evaluate the performance of code optimized by state-of-the-art LLMs, including OpenAI o1, Claude-3.5, and Llama-3.2. In addition to analyzing basic computational kernels, we developed an agent system that integrates LLMs to assess their effectiveness in real HPC applications. Our evaluation focused on key criteria such as execution time, correctness, and understanding of HPC-specific concepts. We also compared the results with those achieved using traditional HPC optimization tools. Based on the findings, we recognized the strengths of LLMs in understanding human instructions and performing automated code transformations. However, we also identified significant limitations, including their tendency to generate incorrect code and their challenges in comprehending complex control and data flows in sophisticated HPC code.
Despite growing enthusiasm for Multi-Agent Systems (MAS), where multiple LLM agents collaborate to accomplish tasks, their performance gains across popular benchmarks remain minimal compared to single-agent frameworks. This gap highlights the need to analyze the challenges hindering MAS effectiveness. In this paper, we present the first comprehensive study of MAS challenges. We analyze five popular MAS frameworks across over 150 tasks, involving six expert human annotators. We identify 14 unique failure modes and propose a comprehensive taxonomy applicable to various MAS frameworks. This taxonomy emerges iteratively from agreements among three expert annotators per study, achieving a Cohen's Kappa score of 0.88. These fine-grained failure modes are organized into 3 categories, (i) specification and system design failures, (ii) inter-agent misalignment, and (iii) task verification and termination. To support scalable evaluation, we integrate MASFT with LLM-as-a-Judge. We also explore if identified failures could be easily prevented by proposing two interventions: improved specification of agent roles and enhanced orchestration strategies. Our findings reveal that identified failures require more complex solutions, highlighting a clear roadmap for future research. We open-source our dataset and LLM annotator.
With the rapid development of artificial intelligence, intelligent decision-making techniques have gradually surpassed human levels in various human-machine competitions, especially in complex multi-agent cooperative task scenarios. Multi-agent cooperative decision-making involves multiple agents working together to complete established tasks and achieve specific objectives. These techniques are widely applicable in real-world scenarios such as autonomous driving, drone navigation, disaster rescue, and simulated military confrontations. This paper begins with a comprehensive survey of the leading simulation environments and platforms used for multi-agent cooperative decision-making. Specifically, we provide an in-depth analysis for these simulation environments from various perspectives, including task formats, reward allocation, and the underlying technologies employed. Subsequently, we provide a comprehensive overview of the mainstream intelligent decision-making approaches, algorithms and models for multi-agent systems (MAS). Theseapproaches can be broadly categorized into five types: rule-based (primarily fuzzy logic), game theory-based, evolutionary algorithms-based, deep multi-agent reinforcement learning (MARL)-based, and large language models(LLMs)reasoning-based. Given the significant advantages of MARL andLLMs-baseddecision-making methods over the traditional rule, game theory, and evolutionary algorithms, this paper focuses on these multi-agent methods utilizing MARL and LLMs-based techniques. We provide an in-depth discussion of these approaches, highlighting their methodology taxonomies, advantages, and drawbacks. Further, several prominent research directions in the future and potential challenges of multi-agent cooperative decision-making are also detailed.
The move toward open Sixth-Generation (6G) networks necessitates a novel approach to full-stack simulation environments for evaluating complex technology developments before prototyping and real-world implementation. This paper introduces an innovative approach\footnote{A lightweight, mock version of the code is available on GitHub at that combines a multi-agent framework with the Network Simulator 3 (ns-3) to automate and optimize the generation, debugging, execution, and analysis of complex 5G network scenarios. Our framework orchestrates a suite of specialized agents -- namely, the Simulation Generation Agent, Test Designer Agent, Test Executor Agent, and Result Interpretation Agent -- using advanced LangChain coordination. The Simulation Generation Agent employs a structured chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning process, leveraging LLMs and retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) to translate natural language simulation specifications into precise ns-3 scripts. Concurrently, the Test Designer Agent generates comprehensive automated test suites by integrating knowledge retrieval techniques with dynamic test case synthesis. The Test Executor Agent dynamically deploys and runs simulations, managing dependencies and parsing detailed performance metrics. At the same time, the Result Interpretation Agent utilizes LLM-driven analysis to extract actionable insights from the simulation outputs. By integrating external resources such as library documentation and ns-3 testing frameworks, our experimental approach can enhance simulation accuracy and adaptability, reducing reliance on extensive programming expertise. A detailed case study using the ns-3 5G-LENA module validates the effectiveness of the proposed approach. The code generation process converges in an average of 1.8 iterations, has a syntax error rate of 17.0%, a mean response time of 7.3 seconds, and receives a human evaluation score of 7.5.
Scientific research demands sophisticated reasoning over multimodal data, a challenge especially prevalent in biology. Despite recent advances in multimodal large language models (MLLMs) for AI-assisted research, existing multimodal reasoning benchmarks only target up to college-level difficulty, while research-level benchmarks emphasize lower-level perception, falling short of the complex multimodal reasoning needed for scientific discovery. To bridge this gap, we introduce MicroVQA, a visual-question answering (VQA) benchmark designed to assess three reasoning capabilities vital in research workflows: expert image understanding, hypothesis generation, and experiment proposal. MicroVQA consists of 1,042 multiple-choice questions (MCQs) curated by biology experts across diverse microscopy modalities, ensuring VQA samples represent real scientific practice. In constructing the benchmark, we find that standard MCQ generation methods induce language shortcuts, motivating a new two-stage pipeline: an optimized LLM prompt structures question-answer pairs into MCQs; then, an agent-based `RefineBot' updates them to remove shortcuts. Benchmarking on state-of-the-art MLLMs reveal a peak performance of 53\%; models with smaller LLMs only slightly underperform top models, suggesting that language-based reasoning is less challenging than multimodal reasoning; and tuning with scientific articles enhances performance. Expert analysis of chain-of-thought responses shows that perception errors are the most frequent, followed by knowledge errors and then overgeneralization errors. These insights highlight the challenges in multimodal scientific reasoning, showing MicroVQA is a valuable resource advancing AI-driven biomedical research. MicroVQA is available at https://huggingface.co/datasets/jmhb/microvqa, and project page at https://jmhb0.github.io/microvqa.
We present PORTAL, a novel framework for developing artificial intelligence agents capable of playing thousands of 3D video games through language-guided policy generation. By transforming decision-making problems into language modeling tasks, our approach leverages large language models (LLMs) to generate behavior trees represented in domain-specific language (DSL). This method eliminates the computational burden associated with traditional reinforcement learning approaches while preserving strategic depth and rapid adaptability. Our framework introduces a hybrid policy structure that combines rule-based nodes with neural network components, enabling both high-level strategic reasoning and precise low-level control. A dual-feedback mechanism incorporating quantitative game metrics and vision-language model analysis facilitates iterative policy improvement at both tactical and strategic levels. The resulting policies are instantaneously deployable, human-interpretable, and capable of generalizing across diverse gaming environments. Experimental results demonstrate PORTAL's effectiveness across thousands of first-person shooter (FPS) games, showcasing significant improvements in development efficiency, policy generalization, and behavior diversity compared to traditional approaches. PORTAL represents a significant advancement in game AI development, offering a practical solution for creating sophisticated agents that can operate across thousands of commercial video games with minimal development overhead. Experiment results on the 3D video games are best viewed on https://zhongwen.one/projects/portal .
As requirements drift with rapid iterations, agile development becomes the dominant paradigm. Goal-driven Requirements Elicitation (RE) is a pivotal yet challenging task in agile project development due to its heavy tangling with adaptive planning and efficient collaboration. Recently, AI agents have shown promising ability in supporting requirements analysis by saving significant time and effort for stakeholders. However, current research mainly focuses on functional RE, and research works have not been reported bridging the long journey from goal to user stories. Moreover, considering the cost of LLM facilities and the need for data and idea protection, privately hosted small-sized LLM should be further utilized in RE. To address these challenges, we propose Goal2Story, a multi-agent fleet that adopts the Impact Mapping (IM) framework while merely using cost-effective sLLMs for goal-driven RE. Moreover, we introduce a StorySeek dataset that contains over 1,000 user stories (USs) with corresponding goals and project context information, as well as the semi-automatic dataset construction method. For evaluation, we proposed two metrics: Factuality Hit Rate (FHR) to measure consistency between the generated USs with the dataset and Quality And Consistency Evaluation (QuACE) to evaluate the quality of the generated USs. Experimental results demonstrate that Goal2Story outperforms the baseline performance of the Super-Agent adopting powerful LLMs, while also showcasing the performance improvements in key metrics brought by CoT and Agent Profile to Goal2Story, as well as its exploration in identifying latent needs.
We introduce a novel large language model (LLM)-driven agent framework, which iteratively refines queries and filters contextual evidence by leveraging dynamically evolving knowledge. A defining feature of the system is its decoupling of external sources from an internal knowledge cache that is progressively updated to guide both query generation and evidence selection. This design mitigates bias-reinforcement loops and enables dynamic, trackable search exploration paths, thereby optimizing the trade-off between exploring diverse information and maintaining accuracy through autonomous agent decision-making. Our approach is evaluated on a broad range of open-domain question answering benchmarks, including multi-step tasks that mirror real-world scenarios where integrating information from multiple sources is critical, especially given the vulnerabilities of LLMs that lack explicit reasoning or planning capabilities. The results show that the proposed system not only outperforms single-step baselines regardless of task difficulty but also, compared to conventional iterative retrieval methods, demonstrates pronounced advantages in complex tasks through precise evidence-based reasoning and enhanced efficiency. The proposed system supports both competitive and collaborative sharing of updated context, enabling multi-agent extension. The benefits of multi-agent configurations become especially prominent as task difficulty increases. The number of convergence steps scales with task difficulty, suggesting cost-effective scalability.
Relational database-driven data analysis (RDB-DA) report generation, which aims to generate data analysis reports after querying relational databases, has been widely applied in fields such as finance and healthcare. Typically, these tasks are manually completed by data scientists, making the process very labor-intensive and showing a clear need for automation. Although existing methods (e.g., Table QA or Text-to-SQL) have been proposed to reduce human dependency, they cannot handle complex analytical tasks that require multi-step reasoning, cross-table associations, and synthesizing insights into reports. Moreover, there is no dataset available for developing automatic RDB-DA report generation. To fill this gap, this paper proposes an LLM agent system for RDB-DA report generation tasks, dubbed DAgent; moreover, we construct a benchmark for automatic data analysis report generation, which includes a new dataset DA-Dataset and evaluation metrics. DAgent integrates planning, tools, and memory modules to decompose natural language questions into logically independent sub-queries, accurately retrieve key information from relational databases, and generate analytical reports that meet the requirements of completeness, correctness, and conciseness through multi-step reasoning and effective data integration. Experimental analysis on the DA-Dataset demonstrates that DAgent's superiority in retrieval performance and analysis report generation quality, showcasing its strong potential for tackling complex database analysis report generation tasks.
Inpatient pathways demand complex clinical decision-making based on comprehensive patient information, posing critical challenges for clinicians. Despite advancements in large language models (LLMs) in medical applications, limited research focused on artificial intelligence (AI) inpatient pathways systems, due to the lack of large-scale inpatient datasets. Moreover, existing medical benchmarks typically concentrated on medical question-answering and examinations, ignoring the multifaceted nature of clinical decision-making in inpatient settings. To address these gaps, we first developed the Inpatient Pathway Decision Support (IPDS) benchmark from the MIMIC-IV database, encompassing 51,274 cases across nine triage departments and 17 major disease categories alongside 16 standardized treatment options. Then, we proposed the Multi-Agent Inpatient Pathways (MAP) framework to accomplish inpatient pathways with three clinical agents, including a triage agent managing the patient admission, a diagnosis agent serving as the primary decision maker at the department, and a treatment agent providing treatment plans. Additionally, our MAP framework includes a chief agent overseeing the inpatient pathways to guide and promote these three clinician agents. Extensive experiments showed our MAP improved the diagnosis accuracy by 25.10% compared to the state-of-the-art LLM HuatuoGPT2-13B. It is worth noting that our MAP demonstrated significant clinical compliance, outperforming three board-certified clinicians by 10%-12%, establishing a foundation for inpatient pathways systems.
The widespread adoption of Large Language Models (LLMs) and LLM-powered agents in multi-user settings underscores the need for reliable, usable methods to accommodate diverse preferences and resolve conflicting directives. Drawing on conflict resolution theory, we introduce a user-centered workflow for multi-user personalization comprising three stages: Reflection, Analysis, and Feedback. We then present MAP -- a \textbf{M}ulti-\textbf{A}gent system for multi-user \textbf{P}ersonalization -- to operationalize this workflow. By delegating subtasks to specialized agents, MAP (1) retrieves and reflects on relevant user information, while enhancing reliability through agent-to-agent interactions, (2) provides detailed analysis for improved transparency and usability, and (3) integrates user feedback to iteratively refine results. Our user study findings (n=12) highlight MAP's effectiveness and usability for conflict resolution while emphasizing the importance of user involvement in resolution verification and failure management. This work highlights the potential of multi-agent systems to implement user-centered, multi-user personalization workflows and concludes by offering insights for personalization in multi-user contexts.
As Large Language Models (LLMs) gain autonomous capabilities, their coordination in multi-agent settings becomes increasingly important. However, they often struggle with cooperation, leading to suboptimal outcomes. Inspired by Axelrod's Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma (IPD) tournaments, we explore how personality traits influence LLM cooperation. Using representation engineering, we steer Big Five traits (e.g., Agreeableness, Conscientiousness) in LLMs and analyze their impact on IPD decision-making. Our results show that higher Agreeableness and Conscientiousness improve cooperation but increase susceptibility to exploitation, highlighting both the potential and limitations of personality-based steering for aligning AI agents.
Recent Large Language Models (LLMs) such as OpenAI o3-mini and DeepSeek-R1 use enhanced reasoning through Chain-of-Thought (CoT). Their potential in hardware design, which relies on expert-driven iterative optimization, remains unexplored. This paper investigates whether reasoning LLMs can address challenges in High-Level Synthesis (HLS) design space exploration and optimization. During HLS, engineers manually define pragmas/directives to balance performance and resource constraints. We propose an LLM-based optimization agentic framework that automatically restructures code, inserts pragmas, and identifies optimal design points via feedback from HLs tools and access to integer-linear programming (ILP) solvers. Experiments compare reasoning models against conventional LLMs on benchmarks using success rate, efficiency, and design quality (area/latency) metrics, and provide the first-ever glimpse into the CoTs produced by a powerful open-source reasoning model like DeepSeek-R1.
AI practitioners increasingly use large language model (LLM) agents in compound AI systems to solve complex reasoning tasks, these agent executions often fail to meet human standards, leading to errors that compromise the system's overall performance. Addressing these failures through human intervention is challenging due to the agents' opaque reasoning processes, misalignment with human expectations, the complexity of agent dependencies, and the high cost of manual inspection. This paper thus introduces a human-centered evaluation framework for Verifying LLM Agent failures (VeriLA), which systematically assesses agent failures to reduce human effort and make these agent failures interpretable to humans. The framework first defines clear expectations of each agent by curating human-designed agent criteria. Then, it develops a human-aligned agent verifier module, trained with human gold standards, to assess each agent's execution output. This approach enables granular evaluation of each agent's performance by revealing failures from a human standard, offering clear guidelines for revision, and reducing human cognitive load. Our case study results show that VeriLA is both interpretable and efficient in helping practitioners interact more effectively with the system. By upholding accountability in human-agent collaboration, VeriLA paves the way for more trustworthy and human-aligned compound AI systems.
In complex multi-agent environments, achieving efficient learning and desirable behaviours is a significant challenge for Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning (MARL) systems. This work explores the potential of combining MARL with Large Language Model (LLM)-mediated interventions to guide agents toward more desirable behaviours. Specifically, we investigate how LLMs can be used to interpret and facilitate interventions that shape the learning trajectories of multiple agents. We experimented with two types of interventions, referred to as controllers: a Natural Language (NL) Controller and a Rule-Based (RB) Controller. The NL Controller, which uses an LLM to simulate human-like interventions, showed a stronger impact than the RB Controller. Our findings indicate that agents particularly benefit from early interventions, leading to more efficient training and higher performance. Both intervention types outperform the baseline without interventions, highlighting the potential of LLM-mediated guidance to accelerate training and enhance MARL performance in challenging environments.
Consensus building is inherently challenging due to the diverse opinions held by stakeholders. Effective facilitation is crucial to support the consensus building process and enable efficient group decision making. However, the effectiveness of facilitation is often constrained by human factors such as limited experience and scalability. In this research, we propose a Parallel Thinking-based Facilitation Agent (PTFA) that facilitates online, text-based consensus building processes. The PTFA automatically collects textual posts and leverages large language models (LLMs) to perform all of the six distinct roles of the well-established Six Thinking Hats technique in parallel thinking. To illustrate the potential of PTFA, a pilot study was carried out and PTFA's ability in idea generation, emotional probing, and deeper analysis of ideas was demonstrated. Furthermore, a comprehensive dataset that contains not only the conversational content among the participants but also between the participants and the agent is constructed for future study.
With the rapid development of Large Language Models (LLMs), LLM-based agents have been widely adopted in various fields, becoming essential for autonomous decision-making and interactive tasks. However, current work typically relies on prompt design or fine-tuning strategies applied to vanilla LLMs, which often leads to limited effectiveness or suboptimal performance in complex agent-related environments. Although LLM optimization techniques can improve model performance across many general tasks, they lack specialized optimization towards critical agent functionalities such as long-term planning, dynamic environmental interaction, and complex decision-making. Although numerous recent studies have explored various strategies to optimize LLM-based agents for complex agent tasks, a systematic review summarizing and comparing these methods from a holistic perspective is still lacking. In this survey, we provide a comprehensive review of LLM-based agent optimization approaches, categorizing them into parameter-driven and parameter-free methods. We first focus on parameter-driven optimization, covering fine-tuning-based optimization, reinforcement learning-based optimization, and hybrid strategies, analyzing key aspects such as trajectory data construction, fine-tuning techniques, reward function design, and optimization algorithms. Additionally, we briefly discuss parameter-free strategies that optimize agent behavior through prompt engineering and external knowledge retrieval. Finally, we summarize the datasets and benchmarks used for evaluation and tuning, review key applications of LLM-based agents, and discuss major challenges and promising future directions. Our repository for related references is available at https://github.com/YoungDubbyDu/LLM-Agent-Optimization.
AI-driven software development has rapidly advanced with the emergence of software development agents that leverage large language models (LLMs) to tackle complex, repository-level software engineering tasks. These agents go beyond just generation of final code; they engage in multi-step reasoning, utilize various tools for code modification and debugging, and interact with execution environments to diagnose and iteratively resolve issues. However, most existing evaluations focus primarily on static analyses of final code outputs, yielding limited insights into the agents' dynamic problem-solving processes. To fill this gap, we conduct an in-depth empirical study on 3,977 solving-phase trajectories and 3,931 testing-phase logs from 8 top-ranked agents evaluated on 500 GitHub issues in the SWE-Bench benchmark. Our exploratory analysis shows that Python execution errors during the issue resolution phase correlate with lower resolution rates and increased reasoning overheads. We have identified the most prevalent errors -- such as ModuleNotFoundError and TypeError -- and highlighted particularly challenging errors like OSError and database-related issues (e.g., IntegrityError) that demand significantly more debugging effort. Furthermore, we have discovered 3 bugs in the SWE-Bench platform that affect benchmark fairness and accuracy; these issues have been reported to and confirmed by the maintainers. To promote transparency and foster future research, we publicly share our datasets and analysis scripts.