Papers by Jonas Becker
Voting or Consensus? Decision-Making in Multi-Agent Debate (2025.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Increasing the number of agents improves performance, while more discussion rounds before voting reduces it. |
| Approach: | They propose two new methods to improve multi-agent debates by increasing agent diversity and reducing discussion rounds before voting. |
| Outcome: | The proposed methods improve task performance by up to 3.3% with AAD and up to 7.4% with CI. |
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. |
DimABSA: Building Multilingual and Multidomain Datasets for Dimensional Aspect-Based Sentiment Analysis (2026.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
Lung-Hao Lee, Liang-Chih Yu, Natalia V Loukachevitch, Ilseyar Alimova, Alexander Panchenko, Tzu-Mi Lin, Zhe-Yu Xu, Jian-Yu Zhou, Guangmin Zheng, Jin Wang, Sharanya Awasthi, Jonas Becker, Jan Philip Wahle, Terry Ruas, Shamsuddeen Hassan Muhammad, Saif M. Mohammad
| Challenge: | Existing ABSA research relies on coarse-grained categorical labels, which limits its ability to capture nuanced affective states. |
| Approach: | They propose a dimensional approach that represents sentiment with continuous valence–arousal (VA) scores, enabling fine-grained analysis at both the aspect and sentiment levels. |
| Outcome: | The proposed approach represents sentiment with continuous valence–arousal (VA) scores, enabling fine-grained analysis at both the aspect and sentiment levels. |
Stay Focused: Problem Drift in Multi-Agent Debate (2026.findings-eacl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Multi-agent debates have shown promise for solving knowledge and reasoning tasks, but they are limited when solving complex problems that require longer reasoning chains. |
| Approach: | They propose a method to detect problem drift and propose 'driFTJudge' which mitigates 31% of problem drift cases. |
| Outcome: | The proposed method mitigates 31% of problem drift cases and is based on a set of ten tasks across ten different tasks. |