The DOI matches its Crossref record; 40 of the 54 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
ChatDev: Communicative Agents for Software Development
Open accessAbstract
Chen Qian, Wei Liu, Hongzhang Liu, Nuo Chen, Yufan Dang, Jiahao Li, Cheng Yang, Weize Chen, Yusheng Su, Xin Cong, Juyuan Xu, Dahai Li, Zhiyuan Liu, Maosong Sun. Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers). 2024.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“In ChatDev [153], for example, a virtual CEO meta-agent distributes subtasks to departmental agents and integrates their outputs into a unified strategic response.”
From AI Agents vs. Agentic AI: A Conceptual taxonomy, applications and challenges (2026) · cites this paper as [153]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Multiple LLM agents working in parallel can solve tasks that are too large for any single agent to finish within its iteration budget (Dong et al., 2024; Qian et al., 2024; Hong et al., 2024; Geng and Neubig, 2026; Qu et al., 2026).”
From Multi-agent Collaboration with State Management (2026) · cites this paper as Qian et al., 2024
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“yet most of them still rely on natural-language soft constraints rather than mathematically explicit safety boundaries.”
From SafeCodeRL: Security-Constrained Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning for Trustworthy LLM-Generated IoT/CPS Software (2026) · cites this paper as [11]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Such soft coordination can be brittle under adversarial prompts, hallucinated critiques, or multi-turn confirmation bias.”
From SafeCodeRL: Security-Constrained Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning for Trustworthy LLM-Generated IoT/CPS Software (2026) · cites this paper as [11]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Such frameworks are particularly well-suited for multi-agent execution scenarios with well-defined agent execution sequences, as exemplified by programming tasks [50, 85] and conversational games [111], as they can significantly simplify complex agent interaction processes.”
From AgentSociety: Large-Scale Simulation of LLM-Driven Generative Agents Advances Understanding of Human Behaviors and Society (2025) · cites this paper as [85]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“This formulation captures a broad class of agentic systems, ranging from a single agent solving reasoning tasks with tool augmentation to teams of role-specialized agents collaboratively developing software (Qian et al., 2024; Wang et al., 2025l) or conducting scientific inquiry (Weng et al., 2025).”
From Memory in the Age of AI Agents (2025) · cites this paper as Qian et al., 2024
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“This formulation captures a broad class of agentic systems, ranging from a single agent solving reasoning tasks with tool augmentation to teams of role-specialized agents collaboratively developing software (Qian et al., 2024; Wang et al., 2025l) or conducting scientific inquiry (Weng et al., 2025).”
From Memory in the Age of AI Agents (2025) · cites this paper as Qian et al., 2024
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Building a software system from scratch requires agents not only to generate code snippets, but also to translate high-level requirements into executable plans, coordinate interdependent tasks, design and integrate components, and continuously test and debug the evolving system [8, 32, 36].”
From Harness-of-Harness: Multi-Day Autonomous Software Development with Continual Improvement (2026) · cites this paper as [32]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Multi-agent coding systems [Qian et al., 2024, Hong et al., 2024, Nguyen et al., 2024, Huang et al., 2024, Ishibashi and Nishimura, 2024, Pan et al., 2026, Islam et al., 2025, Peng et al., 2026, Zhu et al., 2025, Wu et al., 2023, Wang et al., 2025, Park et al., 2023, Chen et al., 2023, Shinn et al., 2023, Ashrafi et al., 2025, Grötschla et al., 2025, Shafin et al., 2025] predominantly use sequ”
From AgentRoom: Concurrent Multi-Agent Coding in a CRDT-Backed Shared Workspace (2026) · cites this paper as Qian et al., 2024
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Multi-agent coding systems improve decomposition and repair by assigning roles to planners, developers, testers, and reviewers [11,12,13]”
From SafeCodeRL: Security-Constrained Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning for Trustworthy LLM-Generated IoT/CPS Software (2026) · cites this paper as [11]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“When subtasks exhibit strict contextual dependencies, hierarchical (Zhang et al., 2024c; Qian et al., 2024) workflows offer a structured alternative.”
From A Comprehensive Survey of Self-Evolving AI Agents: A New Paradigm Bridging Foundation Models and Lifelong Agentic Systems (2025) · cites this paper as Qian et al., 2024
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The publisher hasn’t deposited this paper’s reference list.
Research works printed but not linked: 13
- Thorsten Brants, Ashok C Popat, Peng Xu, Franz J Och, and Jeffrey Dean. 2007. Large Language Models in Machine Translation. In Proceedings of the 2007 Joint Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and Computational Natural Language Learning (EMNLP-CoNLL), pages 858- 867.
- 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 (NeurIPS), volume 33, pages 1877-1901.
- Weize Chen, Yusheng Su, Jingwei Zuo, Cheng Yang, Chenfei Yuan, Chen Qian, Chi-Min Chan, Yujia Qin, Yaxi Lu, Ruobing Xie, et al. 2023b. AgentVerse: Facilitating Multi-agent Collaboration and Explor- ing Emergent Behaviors in Agents. In International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR).
- Robert France and Bernhard Rumpe. 2007. Model- driven Development of Complex Software: A Re- search Roadmap. In Future of Software Engineering (FOSE), pages 37-54.
- Peter Freeman, Donald J. Bagert, Hossein Saiedian, Mary Shaw, Robert Dupuis, and J. Barrie Thompson. 2001. Software Engineering Body of Knowledge (SWEBOK). In Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), pages 693-696.
- Sirui Hong, Mingchen Zhuge, Jonathan Chen, Xiawu Zheng, Yuheng Cheng, Ceyao Zhang, Jinlin Wang, Zili Wang, Steven Ka Shing Yau, Zijuan Lin, Liyang Zhou, Chenyu Ran, Lingfeng Xiao, Chenglin Wu, and Jürgen Schmidhuber. 2023. MetaGPT: Meta Pro- gramming for A Multi-Agent Collaborative Frame- work. In International Conference on Learning Rep- resentations (ICLR).
- Guohao Li, Hasan Abed Al Kader Hammoud, Hani Itani, Dmitrii Khizbullin, and Bernard Ghanem. 2023a. CAMEL: Communicative Agents for "Mind" Exploration of Large Scale Language Model Society. In Thirty-seventh Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS).
- Erik Nijkamp, Bo Pang, Hiroaki Hayashi, Lifu Tu, Huan Wang, Yingbo Zhou, Silvio Savarese, and Caiming Xiong. 2023. CodeGen: An Open Large Language Model for Code with Multi-Turn Program Synthe- sis. In The International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR).
- Florian Pudlitz, Florian Brokhausen, and Andreas Vo- gelsang. 2019. Extraction of System States from Natural Language Requirements. In IEEE Interna- tional Requirements Engineering Conference (RE), pages 211-222. · DOI
- Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N Gomez, Łukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. 2017. Attention is All You Need. In Advances in Neural Information Pro- cessing Systems (NeurIPS), volume 30.
- Chengcheng Wan, Shicheng Liu, Sophie Xie, Yifan Liu, Henry Hoffmann, Michael Maire, and Shan Lu. 2022. Automated Testing of Software that Uses Ma- chine Learning APIs. In IEEE/ACM International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), pages 212-224. · DOI
- Song Wang, Nishtha Shrestha, Abarna Kucheri Subbu- raman, Junjie Wang, Moshi Wei, and Nachiappan Nagappan. 2021. Automatic Unit Test Generation for Machine Learning Libraries: How Far Are We? In IEEE/ACM International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), pages 1548-1560. · DOI
- Jonas Winkler, Jannis Grönberg, and Andreas Vogel- sang. 2020. Predicting How to Test Requirements: An Automated Approach. In Software Engineering, volume P-300 of LNI, pages 141-142. · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A survey on LLM-based multi-agent systems: Workflow, infrastructure, and challenges
Li, X., Wang, S., Zeng, S., Wu, Y., & Yang, Y. (2024) · Vicinagearth · doi:10.1007/s44336-024-00009-2 · Cited by 404
“For instance, agents in ChatDev [30] collaborate through communication to collectively accomplish software development tasks.”
InfluentialLarge language models empowered agent-based modeling and simulation: a survey and perspectives
Gao, C., Lan, X., Li, N., Yuan, Y., Ding, J., Zhou, Z., Xu, F., & Li, Y. (2024) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-024-03611-3 · Cited by 294
AI Agents vs. Agentic AI: A Conceptual taxonomy, applications and challenges
Sapkota, R., Roumeliotis, K. I., & Karkee, M. (2026) · Information Fusion · doi:10.1016/j.inffus.2025.103599 · Cited by 671
“A set of basic distinctions between AI Agents and Agentic AI systems, particularly in terms of scope, autonomy, architectural composition, coordination strategy, and operational complexity, are synthesized in Table I, which was derived from close analysis of prominent frameworks such as Au-toGen…”
MetaGPT: Meta Programming for A Multi-Agent Collaborative Framework
Hong, S., Zhuge, M., Chen, J., Zheng, X., Cheng, Y., Zhang, C., Wang, J., Wang, Z., Yau, S. K. S., Lin, Z., et al. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2308.00352 · Cited by 214
AI-driven innovations in software engineering: a review of current practices and future directions
Alenezi, M., & Akour, M. (2025) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app15031344 · Cited by 121
Metadata
- Authors
- Qian, C., Liu, W., Liu, H., Chen, N., Dang, Y., Li, J., Yang, C., Chen, W., Su, Y., Cong, X., Xu, J., Li, D., Liu, Z., & Sun, M.
- Affiliations
- The University of Sydney (AU)
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers)
- Published
- 2024
- Pages
- 15174-15186
- ISSN
- 0736-587X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4402684050
- Semantic Scholar
- 9474b463654fd92a62c103b21f95aed94b087907
- Cited by
- 490
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 313 · 2025: 151 · 2024: 26
- FWCI
- 157.36
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Proceedings of the conference - Association for Computational Linguistics. Meeting (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- Tencent
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Research
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
- Keywords
- large language models, software development, code generation, code review, developer communication, chatbots
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
