Cited by 36Multi-Agent Systems and NegotiationTopic ModelingLogic, Reasoning, and Knowledge

Learning to break: Knowledge-enhanced reasoning in multi-agent debate system

Open access
Wang, Haotian, Du, Xiyuan, Yu, Weijiang, Chen, Qianglong, Zhu, Kun, Chu, Zheng, Yan, Lian, Guan, Yi·2025·Neurocomputing

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neucom.2024.129063

Cites

20 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Most multi-agent debate systems rely on parametric knowledge or generic sources without domain-specific retrieval tailored to each agent's role.

    “most multi-agent debate systems rely on parametric knowledge or generic sources without domain-specific retrieval tailored to each agent's role.”

    From Multi-Agent debate system based on large language models: structured deliberation and validation in satellite communications (2026) · cites this paper as Wang et al., 2025b

    Sections 2.1 and 3.1 describe existing multi-agent debates as vulnerable to agents’ limited and differing background knowledge, and Section 2.2 contrasts the authors’ adaptive, personalized knowledge selection with existing methods. The paper does not establish that *most* systems rely on parametric knowledge or generic sources, nor does it specifically characterize prior systems by a lack of domain-specific retrieval tailored to each agent’s role. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 39

  1. Jinze Bai, Shuai Bai, Yunfei Chu, Zeyu Cui, Kai Dang, Xiaodong Deng, Yang Fan, Wenbin Ge, Yu Han, Fei Huang, Binyuan Hui, Luo Ji, Mei Li, Junyang Lin, Runji Lin, Dayiheng Liu, Gao Liu, Chengqiang Lu, Keming Lu, Jianxin Ma, Rui Men, Xingzhang Ren, Xuancheng Ren, Chuanqi Tan, Sinan Tan, Jianhong Tu, Peng Wang, Shijie Wang, Wei Wang, Sheng- guang Wu, Benfeng Xu, Jin Xu, An Yang, Hao Yang, Jian Yang, Shusheng Yang, Yang Yao, Bowen Yu, Hongyi Yuan, Zheng Yuan, Jianwei Zhang, Xingx- uan Zhang, Yichang Zhang, Zhenru Zhang, Chang Zhou, Jingren Zhou, Xiaohuan Zhou, and Tianhang Zhu. 2023. Qwen technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.16609. · arXiv
  2. Tom Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, Melanie Subbiah, Jared D Kaplan, Prafulla Dhariwal, Arvind Neelakantan, Pranav Shyam, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, Sandhini Agarwal, Ariel Herbert-Voss, Gretchen Krueger, Tom Henighan, Rewon Child, Aditya Ramesh, Daniel Ziegler, Jeffrey Wu, Clemens Winter, Chris Hesse, Mark Chen, Eric Sigler, Ma- teusz Litwin, Scott Gray, Benjamin Chess, Jack Clark, Christopher Berner, Sam McCandlish, Alec Radford, Ilya Sutskever, and Dario Amodei. 2020. Language models are few-shot learners. In Ad- vances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 33, pages 1877-1901.
  3. Curran Associates, Inc. Chi-Min Chan, Weize Chen, Yusheng Su, Jianxuan Yu, Wei Xue, Shanghang Zhang, Jie Fu, and Zhiyuan Liu. 2023. Chateval: Towards better llm-based eval- uators through multi-agent debate. arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.07201. · arXiv
  4. Hailin Chen, Fangkai Jiao, Xingxuan Li, Chengwei Qin, Mathieu Ravaut, Ruochen Zhao, Caiming Xiong, and Shafiq Joty. 2023a. Chatgpt's one-year anniversary: Are open-source large language models catching up? arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.16989. · arXiv
  5. Yilun Du, Shuang Li, Antonio Torralba, Joshua B Tenen- baum, and Igor Mordatch. 2023. Improving factual- ity and reasoning in language models through multia- gent debate. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.14325. · arXiv
  6. Zhangyin Feng, Weitao Ma, Weijiang Yu, Lei Huang, Haotian Wang, Qianglong Chen, Weihua Peng, Xi- aocheng Feng, Bing Qin, et al. 2023. Trends in inte- gration of knowledge and large language models: A survey and taxonomy of methods, benchmarks, and applications. arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.05876. · arXiv
  7. Yao Fu, Hao Peng, Tushar Khot, and Mirella Lapata. 2023. Improving language model negotiation with self-play and in-context learning from ai feedback. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.10142. · arXiv
  8. Hangfeng He, Hongming Zhang, and Dan Roth. 2022. Rethinking with retrieval: Faithful large language model inference. arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.00303. · arXiv
  9. Dan Hendrycks, Collin Burns, Steven Basart, Andy Zou, Mantas Mazeika, Dawn Song, and Jacob Steinhardt. 2021. Measuring massive multitask language under- standing. In International Conference on Learning Representations.
  10. Gautier Izacard, Patrick Lewis, Maria Lomeli, Lu- cas Hosseini, Fabio Petroni, Timo Schick, Jane Dwivedi-Yu, Armand Joulin, Sebastian Riedel, and Edouard Grave. 2022. Few-shot learning with re- trieval augmented language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2208.03299. · arXiv
  11. Yu He Ke, Rui Yang, Sui An Lie, Taylor Xin Yi Lim, Hairil Rizal Abdullah, Daniel Shu Wei Ting, and Nan Liu. 2024. Enhancing diagnostic accuracy through multi-agent conversations: Using large language models to mitigate cognitive bias. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.14589. · arXiv
  12. Nitish Shirish Keskar, Bryan McCann, Lav R Varshney, Caiming Xiong, and Richard Socher. 2019. Ctrl: A conditional transformer language model for control- lable generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:1909.05858. · arXiv
  13. Takeshi Kojima, Shixiang Shane Gu, Machel Reid, Yu- taka Matsuo, and Yusuke Iwasawa. 2022. Large lan- guage models are zero-shot reasoners. In NeurIPS.
  14. Xiao Liu, Hanyu Lai, Hao Yu, Yifan Xu, Aohan Zeng, Zhengxiao Du, Peng Zhang, Yuxiao Dong, and Jie Tang. 2023. Webglm: Towards an efficient web- enhanced question answering system with human preferences. In KDD, page 4549-4560.
  15. Hongyin Luo, Tianhua Zhang, Yung-Sung Chuang, Yuan Gong, Yoon Kim, Xixin Wu, Helen Meng, and James Glass. 2023. Search augmented instruction learning. In Findings of EMNLP, pages 3717-3729.
  16. Joon Sung Park, Joseph O'Brien, Carrie Jun Cai, Mered- ith Ringel Morris, Percy Liang, and Michael S. Bern- stein. 2023. Generative agents: Interactive simulacra of human behavior. In UIST.
  17. Xiao Pu, Mingqi Gao, and Xiaojun Wan. 2023. Summarization is (almost) dead. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.09558. · arXiv
  18. Chen Qian, Xin Cong, Cheng Yang, Weize Chen, Yusheng Su, Juyuan Xu, Zhiyuan Liu, and Maosong Sun. 2023. Communicative agents for software de- velopment. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.07924. · arXiv
  19. Zhihong Shao, Yeyun Gong, Yelong Shen, Minlie Huang, Nan Duan, and Weizhu Chen. 2023. Enhanc- ing retrieval-augmented large language models with iterative retrieval-generation synergy. In Findings of EMNLP, pages 9248-9274.
  20. Kurt Shuster, Spencer Poff, Moya Chen, Douwe Kiela, and Jason Weston. 2021. Retrieval augmentation reduces hallucination in conversation. In Findings of EMNLP, pages 3784-3803.
  21. Noam Slonim, Yonatan Bilu, Carlos Alzate, Roy Bar-Haim, Ben Bogin, Francesca Bonin, Leshem Choshen, Edo Cohen-Karlik, Lena Dankin, Lilach Edelstein, et al. 2021. An autonomous debating sys- tem. Nature, 591(7850):379-384.
  22. Andries Smit, Paul Duckworth, Nathan Grinsztajn, Kale-ab Tessera, Thomas D Barrett, and Arnu Preto- rius. 2023. Are we going mad? benchmarking multi- agent debate between language models for medical q&a. arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.17371. · arXiv
  23. James Thorne, Andreas Vlachos, Christos Christodoulopoulos, and Arpit Mittal. 2018. Fever: a large-scale dataset for fact extraction and verification. In NAACL, pages 809-819.
  24. Hugo Touvron, Louis Martin, Kevin Stone, Peter Al- bert, Amjad Almahairi, Yasmine Babaei, Nikolay Bashlykov, Soumya Batra, Prajjwal Bhargava, Shruti Bhosale, et al. 2023. Llama 2: Open founda- tion and fine-tuned chat models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.09288. · arXiv
  25. Harsh Trivedi, Niranjan Balasubramanian, Tushar Khot, and Ashish Sabharwal. 2023. Interleaving retrieval with chain-of-thought reasoning for knowledge- intensive multi-step questions. In ACL, pages 10014- 10037.
  26. Xuezhi Wang, Jason Wei, Dale Schuurmans, Quoc V Le, Ed H Chi, Sharan Narang, Aakanksha Chowdhery, and Denny Zhou. 2022. Self-consistency improves chain of thought reasoning in language models. In ICLR.
  27. Jason Wei, Yi Tay, Rishi Bommasani, Colin Raffel, Barret Zoph, Sebastian Borgeaud, Dani Yogatama, Maarten Bosma, Denny Zhou, Donald Metzler, et al. 2022. Emergent abilities of large language models. Transactions on Machine Learning Research.
  28. Ross Williams, Niyousha Hosseinichimeh, Aritra Ma- jumdar, and Navid Ghaffarzadegan. 2023. Epidemic modeling with generative agents. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.04986. · arXiv
  29. Zhiheng Xi, Wenxiang Chen, Xin Guo, Wei He, Yiwen Ding, Boyang Hong, Ming Zhang, Junzhe Wang, Senjie Jin, Enyu Zhou, et al. 2023. The rise and potential of large language model based agents: A survey. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.07864. · arXiv
  30. Ziyang Xiao, Dongxiang Zhang, Yangjun Wu, Lilin Xu, Yuan Jessica Wang, Xiongwei Han, Xiaojin Fu, Tao Zhong, Jia Zeng, Mingli Song, and Gang Chen. 2024. Chain-of-experts: When LLMs meet complex opera- tions research problems. In The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations.
  31. Kai Xiong, Xiao Ding, Yixin Cao, Ting Liu, and Bing Qin. 2023. Examining inter-consistency of large lan- guage models collaboration: An in-depth analysis via debate. In Findings of EMNLP, pages 7572-7590.
  32. Xiaohan Xu, Ming Li, Chongyang Tao, Tao Shen, Reynold Cheng, Jinyang Li, Can Xu, Dacheng Tao, and Tianyi Zhou. 2024. A survey on knowledge dis- tillation of large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.13116. · arXiv
  33. Zhenran Xu, Senbao Shi, Baotian Hu, Jindi Yu, Dong- fang Li, Min Zhang, and Yuxiang Wu. 2023. To- wards reasoning in large language models via multi- agent peer review collaboration. arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.08152. · arXiv
  34. Zhilin Yang, Peng Qi, Saizheng Zhang, Yoshua Bengio, William Cohen, Ruslan Salakhutdinov, and Christo- pher D Manning. 2018. Hotpotqa: A dataset for diverse, explainable multi-hop question answering. In EMNLP, pages 2369-2380.
  35. Shunyu Yao, Jeffrey Zhao, Dian Yu, Nan Du, Izhak Shafran, Karthik R Narasimhan, and Yuan Cao. 2022. React: Synergizing reasoning and acting in language models. In ICLR.
  36. Zhangyue Yin, Qiushi Sun, Qipeng Guo, Jiawen Wu, Xipeng Qiu, and Xuan-Jing Huang. 2023. Do large language models know what they don't know? In Findings of the Association for Computational Lin- guistics: ACL 2023, pages 8653-8665.
  37. Ceyao Zhang, Kaijie Yang, Siyi Hu, Zihao Wang, Guanghe Li, Yihang Sun, Cheng Zhang, Zhaowei Zhang, Anji Liu, Song-Chun Zhu, et al. 2023. Proa- gent: Building proactive cooperative ai with large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.11339. · arXiv
  38. Lianmin Zheng, Wei-Lin Chiang, Ying Sheng, Siyuan Zhuang, Zhanghao Wu, Yonghao Zhuang, Zi Lin, Zhuohan Li, Dacheng Li, Eric Xing, Hao Zhang, Joseph E. Gonzalez, and Ion Stoica. 2023. Judging LLM-as-a-judge with MT-bench and chatbot arena. In NeurIPS Datasets and Benchmarks Track.
  39. Ao Zou, Wenning Hao, Dawei Jin, Shichen Zou, Yu Zheng, Feiyan Sun, and Li Xiang. 2024. An ef- ficient corpus indexer for dynamic corpora retrieval. Expert Systems with Applications, 254:124306. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wang, H., Du, X., Yu, W., Chen, Q., Zhu, K., Chu, Z., Yan, L., & Guan, Y.
Affiliations
  • Harbin Institute of Technology (CN)
  • Sun Yat-sen University (CN)
  • Zhejiang University (CN)
Corresponding author
Guan, Yi
Venue
Neurocomputing
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2025-02
Volume
618
Pages
129063
ISSN
0925-2312 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4404958317
Cited by
36
References
20
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 6
FWCI
4.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neurocomputing (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
National Key Research and Development Program of China (2021ZD0113302, 2021ZD0110900)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Multi-Agent Systems and Negotiation
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Logic, Reasoning, and Knowledge
Keywords
knowledge consistency, large language models

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review