Challenge: Existing data annotation methods suffer from high annotation cost and lack of effective automatic validation.
Approach: They propose a Fine-grained Multi-Agent Debate framework and a dataset that prompts multiple agents to debate and then a Multi-agent Debates Reward Model (MRM) to improve its mathematical reasoning capabilities.
Outcome: The proposed model outperforms the state-of-the-art methods by 1.2% and 3.5% on a GSM8K dataset and 45.1% on the MATH dataset.

Similar Papers

Debate-Feedback: A Multi-Agent Framework for Efficient Legal Judgment Prediction (2025.naacl-short)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Comparative experiments show that our model outperforms several general-purpose and domain-specific legal models.
Approach: They propose a legal judgment prediction model that integrates LLMs with argumentative reasoning techniques to simulate the debate phase of real courtroom trials.
Outcome: The proposed model outperforms several general-purpose and domain-specific legal models and offers a dynamic reasoning process.
Latent Agents: A Post-Training Procedure for Internalized Multi-Agent Debate (2026.acl-long)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Multi-agent debate is compute-intensive and requires long transcripts before answering questions.
Approach: They propose a framework that distills multi-agent debate into a single LLM by combining debate structure learning with internalization via dynamic reward scheduling and length clipping.
Outcome: The proposed model matches or exceeds explicit multi-agent debate performance using 93% fewer tokens across multiple models and benchmarks.
MALLM: Multi-Agent Large Language Models Framework (2025.emnlp-demos)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Multi-agent debate (MAD) has demonstrated the ability to augment collective intelligence by scaling test-time compute and leveraging expertise.
Approach: They propose an open-source framework that enables systematic analysis of multi-agent debates.
Outcome: The proposed framework enables systematic analysis of multi-agent debate components.
Math-LLaVA: Bootstrapping Mathematical Reasoning for Multimodal Large Language Models (2024.findings-emnlp)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing image instruction fine-tuning datasets do not fully exploit visual information to enhance multimodal reasoning capabilities of Large language models (LLMs).
Approach: They propose a LLaVA-based model fine-tuned with MathV360K to bridge this gap by collecting 40K high-quality images with question-answer pairs from 24 existing datasets and synthesizing 320K new pairs.
Outcome: The proposed model improves the multimodal reasoning capabilities of LLaVA-1.5 and demonstrates enhanced generalizability on the MMMU benchmark.
CortexDebate: Debating Sparsely and Equally for Multi-Agent Debate (2025.findings-acl)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing methods to improve the reasoning performance of LLMs suffer from two major shortcomings: too lengthy input contexts and overconfidence dilemma.
Approach: They propose a method to debating among LLM agents using a sparse debator graph . they use a module called McKinsey-based Debate Matter to optimize the debators .
Outcome: The proposed method has been well demonstrated across eight datasets from four task types.
DEBATE: Devil’s Advocate-Based Assessment and Text Evaluation (2024.findings-acl)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing methods for evaluating the quality of machine-generated texts have a relatively low correlation with human performance.
Approach: They propose an NLG evaluation framework based on multi-agent scoring system augmented with a concept of Devil’s Advocate.
Outcome: The proposed evaluation framework outperforms the previous state-of-the-art methods in two meta-evaluation benchmarks in NLG evaluation, SummEval and TopicalChat.
Debate, Deliberate, Decide (D3): A Cost-Aware Adversarial Framework for Reliable and Interpretable LLM Evaluation (2026.eacl-long)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing evaluation tools for Large Language Models (LLMs) are inconsistency, bias, and lack of transparent decision criteria.
Approach: They propose a cost-aware, adversarial multi-agent framework that orchestrates structured debate among role-specialized agents to produce reliable and interpretable evaluations.
Outcome: The proposed framework orchestrates structured debate among role-specialized agents to produce reliable and interpretable evaluations.
Socratic Style Chain-of-Thoughts Help LLMs to be a Better Reasoner (2025.findings-acl)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Synthetic data generation is a promising approach to enhance reasoning capabilities of large language models.
Approach: They propose a multi-agent debate framework based on the Socratic questioning strategy . they use socratic questions to deepen the thinking process and broaden it to motivate self-reflection .
Outcome: The proposed framework outperforms existing methods on math and code generation tasks while maintaining affordable costs.
M-MAD: Multidimensional Multi-Agent Debate for Advanced Machine Translation Evaluation (2025.acl-long)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have shown their potential to deliver human-like judgments.
Approach: They propose a systematic LLM-based multi-agent framework for advanced LLM as-a-judge MT evaluation that integrates dimension-specific results into a final evaluation judgment.
Outcome: The proposed framework outperforms existing LLM-as-a-judge methods and competes with state-of-the-art automatic metrics even when powered by a suboptimal model like GPT-4o mini.
S2-MAD: Breaking the Token Barrier to Enhance Multi-Agent Debate Efficiency (2025.naacl-long)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Large language models exhibit limitations when handling complex mathematical reasoning and logical inference tasks.
Approach: They propose a sparsification strategy to reduce token costs within Multi-agent Debate (MAD) this strategy minimizes ineffective exchanges of information and unproductive discussions among agents .
Outcome: The proposed approach reduces token costs by up to 94.5% while maintaining performance degradation below 2.0%.

What is GenGO?

GenGO is an NLP powered publication search system. It currenctly indexes 30k+ papers from ACL Anthology, and implements multi-aspect summarization, semantic search, and more!

Information

About
Limitations