The DOI matches its DataCite record; 46 of the 46 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Landscape of Emerging AI Agent Architectures for Reasoning, Planning, and Tool Calling: A Survey
Open accessAbstract
This survey paper examines the recent advancements in AI agent implementations, with a focus on their ability to achieve complex goals that require enhanced reasoning, planning, and tool execution capabilities. The primary objectives of this work are to a) communicate the current capabilities and limitations of existing AI agent implementations, b) share insights gained from our observations of these systems in action, and c) suggest important considerations for future developments in AI agent design. We achieve this by providing overviews of single-agent and multi-agent architectures, identifying key patterns and divergences in design choices, and evaluating their overall impact on accomplishing a provided goal. Our contribution outlines key themes when selecting an agentic architecture, the impact of leadership on agent systems, agent communication styles, and key phases for planning, execution, and reflection that enable robust AI agent systems.
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 cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Multi-Agent Systems (MAS) are designed to overcome the limitations of single-agent systems in context capacity (Yu et al., 2026), insufficient exploration (Gurjar et al., 2026), and inefficient serial execution (Masterman et al., 2024), through specialized collaboration (Guo et al., 2024).”
From MS-Eval: Benchmarking Sub-Agent Delegation and Orchestration in MCP-Intensive Working Scenarios (2026) · cites this paper as Masterman et al., 2024
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“In these works, LLMs are often used to help an agent plan its actions [4], [13], [14], despite evidence that they may not be capable of reliably planning [15].”
From Episodic Memory in AI Agents Poses Risks that Should be Studied and Mitigated (2025) · cites this paper as [4]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“There is simultaneously a growing interest in developing AI agents , models that are trained and equipped to take actions that affect the world [4], [5].”
From Episodic Memory in AI Agents Poses Risks that Should be Studied and Mitigated (2025) · cites this paper as [4]
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
Chain-Of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models
Wei, J., Wang, X., Schuurmans, D., Bosma, M., Ichter, B., Xia, F., Chi, E., Le, Q. V., & Zhou, D. (2022) · Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 35 · doi:10.52202/068431-1800 · Cited by 4,505 · cited 2×
“Solutions that use multiple agent personas to solve problems also show significant improvements compared to Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting where the model is asked to break down its plans step by step [28, 29].”
BackgroundMethodChain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models
Wei, J., Wang, X., Schuurmans, D., Bosma, M., Ichter, B., Xia, F., Chi, E., Le, Q., & Zhou, D. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2201.11903 · Cited by 4,263
Bias and Fairness in Large Language Models: A Survey
Gallegos, I. O., Rossi, R. A., Barrow, J., Tanjim, M. M., Kim, S., Dernoncourt, F., Yu, T., Zhang, R., & Ahmed, N. K. (2024) · Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/coli_a_00524 · Cited by 1,245 · cited 1×
“Language Models have been known to exhibit bias both in terms of evaluation as well as in social or fairness terms [5].”
BackgroundTree of Thoughts: Deliberate Problem Solving with Large Language Models
Yao, S., Yu, D., Zhao, J., Shafran, I., Griffiths, T. L., Cao, Y., & Narasimhan, K. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2305.10601 · Cited by 1,158 · cited 1×
“For example, Plan Like a Graph (PLaG) is an approach that represents plans as directed graphs, with multiple steps being executed in parallel [15, 33].”
BackgroundReflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learning
Shinn, N., Cassano, F., Berman, E., Gopinath, A., Narasimhan, K., & Yao, S. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2303.11366 · Cited by 1,087 · cited 3×
“Reflexion is a single-agent pattern that uses self-reflection through linguistic feedback [23].”
BackgroundMethodThe Rise and Potential of Large Language Model Based Agents: A Survey
Xi, Z., Chen, W., Guo, X., He, W., Ding, Y., Hong, B., Zhang, M., Wang, J., Jin, S., Zhou, E., et al. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2309.07864 · Cited by 972 · cited 1×
“In this paper, we follow the definition of agent that consists of “brain, perception, and action” [31].”
MethodInfluentialThe rise and potential of large language model based agents: a survey
Xi, Z., Chen, W., Guo, X., He, W., Ding, Y., Hong, B., Zhang, M., Wang, J., Jin, S., Zhou, E., et al. (2025) · Science China Information Sciences · doi:10.1007/s11432-024-4222-0 · Cited by 970
ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Models
Yao, S., Zhao, J., Yu, D., Du, N., Shafran, I., Narasimhan, K., & Cao, Y. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2210.03629 · Cited by 608 · cited 6×
“We find that successful goal execution by agents is contingent upon proper planning and self-correction [32, 16, 23, 1].”
InfluentialTraining Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems
Cobbe, K., Kosaraju, V., Bavarian, M., Chen, M., Jun, H., Kaiser, L., Plappert, M., Tworek, J., Hilton, J., Nakano, R., et al. (2021) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2110.14168 · Cited by 575 · cited 1×
“Many language model benchmarks are designed to be solved in a single iteration, with no tool calls, such as MMLU or GSM8K [3, 10].”
BackgroundA Dynamic LLM-Powered Agent Network for Task-Oriented Agent CollaborationPreprint
Liu, Z., Zhang, Y., Li, P., Liu, Y., & Yang, D. (2023) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2310.02170 · Cited by 320 · cited 2×
“Many multi-agent architectures work in stages where teams of agents are created and reorganized dynamically for each planning, execution, and evaluation phase [2, 9, 18].”
BackgroundMeasuring Massive Multitask Language Understanding
Hendrycks, D., Burns, C., Basart, S., Zou, A., Mazeika, M., Song, D., & Steinhardt, J. (2020) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2009.03300 · Cited by 291 · cited 1×
“Many language model benchmarks are designed to be solved in a single iteration, with no tool calls, such as MMLU or GSM8K [3, 10].”
BackgroundAI deception: A survey of examples, risks, and potential solutions
Park, P. S., Goldstein, S., O’Gara, A., Chen, M., & Hendrycks, D. (2024) · Patterns · doi:10.1016/j.patter.2024.100988 · Cited by 243 · cited 1×
“Language models also exhibit sycophantic behavior, where they “tend to mirror the user’s stance, even if it means forgoing the presentation of an impartial or balanced viewpoint” [20].”
BackgroundRethinking the Bounds of LLM Reasoning: Are Multi-Agent Discussions the Key?Preprint
Wang, Q., Wang, Z., Su, Y., Tong, H.-H., & Song, Y.-Q. (2024) · Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2402.18272 · Cited by 243 · cited 2×
“Crucially, Wang et. al finds that multi-agent patterns perform better than single agents in scenarios when no examples are provided [26].”
BackgroundAI Deception: A Survey of Examples, Risks, and Potential Solutions
Park, P. S., Goldstein, S., O'Gara, A., Chen, M., & Hendrycks, D. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2308.14752 · Cited by 243
Did Aristotle Use a Laptop? A Question Answering Benchmark with Implicit Reasoning Strategies
Geva, M., Khashabi, D., Segal, E., Khot, T., Roth, D., & Berant, J. (2021) · Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/tacl_a_00370 · Cited by 242 · cited 1×
“StrategyQA improves upon this by assessing models’ reasoning abilities over multiple steps, but the answers are limited to Yes/No responses [7].”
BackgroundMetaGPT: 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 · cited 1×
“MetaGPT addresses the issue of unproductive chatter amongst agents by requiring agents to generate structured outputs like documents and diagrams instead of sharing unstructured chat messages [11].”
BackgroundPersonality Traits in Large Language Models
Serapio-García, G., Safdari, M., Crepy, C., Sun, L., Fitz, S., Romero, P., Abdulhai, M., Faust, A., & Matarić, M. (2023) · arXiv · Cited by 137 · cited 1×
“Researchers have found that “shaped personality verifiably influences Large Language Model (LLM) behavior in common downstream (i.e. subsequent) tasks, such as writing social media posts” [21].”
BackgroundEmbodied LLM Agents Learn to Cooperate in Organized Teams
Guo, X., Huang, K., Liu, J., Fan, W., Vélez, N., Wu, Q., Wang, H., Griffiths, T. L., & Wang, M. (2026) · IEEE Transactions on Computational Social Systems · doi:10.1109/tcss.2025.3637527 · Cited by 110 · cited 5×
“Beyond team structure, the paper emphasizes the importance of employing a “criticize-reflect” step for generating plans, evaluating performance, providing feedback, and re-organizing the team [9].”
BackgroundInfluentialAgentBench: Evaluating LLMs as Agents
Liu, X., Yu, H., Zhang, H., Xu, Y., Lei, X., Lai, H., Gu, Y., Ding, H., Men, K., Yang, K., et al. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2308.03688 · Cited by 79 · cited 3×
“Benchmarks like AgentBench and SmartPlay introduce objective evaluation metrics designed to evaluate the implementation’s success rate, output similarity to human responses, and overall efficiency [17, 30].”
BackgroundHow Language Model Hallucinations Can Snowball
Zhang, M., Press, O., Merrill, W., Liu, A., & Smith, N. A. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2305.13534 · Cited by 77 · cited 1×
“This is partially because language models tend to commit to an answer earlier in their response, which can cause a ‘snowball effect’ of increasing diversion from their goal state [34] .”
BackgroundWang, Z., Mao, S., Wu, W., Ge, T., Wei, F., & Ji, H. (2024) · Proceedings of the 2024 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (Volume 1: Long Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/2024.naacl-long.15 · Cited by 74 · cited 1×
“Solutions that use multiple agent personas to solve problems also show significant improvements compared to Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting where the model is asked to break down its plans step by step [28, 29].”
BackgroundSWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?
Jimenez, C. E., Yang, J., Wettig, A., Yao, S., Pei, K., Press, O., & Narasimhan, K. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2310.06770 · Cited by 72 · cited 1×
“For example, SWE-bench is a benchmark that uses a set of real-world issues raised on GitHub for software engineering tasks in Python [13].”
MethodLarge Language Model-based Human-Agent Collaboration for Complex Task Solving
Feng, X.-Y., Chen, Z.-Y., Qin, Y., Lin, Y., Chen, X., Liu, Z.-Y., & Wen, J.-R. (2024) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2402.12914 · Cited by 72 · cited 1×
“As of today, including human validation and feedback in the agent architecture yields more reliable and trustworthy results [4, 9].”
BackgroundDyVal: Dynamic Evaluation of Large Language Models for Reasoning TasksPreprint
Zhu, K., Chen, J., Wang, J., Gong, N. Z., Yang, D., & Xie, X. (2023) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2309.17167 · Cited by 70 · cited 2×
“Emerging research indicates that there is significant data contamination in the model’s training data, supported by the observation that a model’s performance significantly worsens when benchmark questions are modified [8, 38, 37].”
BackgroundDid Aristotle Use a Laptop? A Question Answering Benchmark with Implicit Reasoning StrategiesPreprint
Geva, M., Khashabi, D., Segal, E., Khot, T., Roth, D., & Berant, J. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2101.02235 · Cited by 70
Bias and Fairness in Large Language Models: A SurveyPreprint
Gallegos, I. O., Rossi, R. A., Barrow, J., et al. (2023) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2309.00770 · Cited by 58
Benchmark Self-Evolving: A Multi-Agent Framework for Dynamic LLM EvaluationPreprint
Wang, S., Long, Z., Fan, Z., Wei, Z., & Huang, X. (2024) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2402.11443 · Cited by 51 · cited 1×
“Researchers have also explored the idea of generating an entirely synthetic benchmark based on a user’s specific environment or use case [14, 27].”
BackgroundUnderstanding the planning of LLM agents: A survey
Huang, X., Liu, W., Chen, X., Wang, X., Wang, H., Lian, D., Wang, Y., Tang, R., & Chen, E. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2402.02716 · Cited by 47 · cited 1×
“Planning, which requires strong reasoning abilities, commonly falls into one of five major approaches: task decomposition, multi-plan selection, external module-aided planning, reflection and refinement and memory-augmented planning [12].”
BackgroundSystematic Biases in LLM Simulations of Debates
Taubenfeld, A., Dover, Y., Reichart, R., & Goldstein, A. (2024) · Proceedings of the 2024 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/2024.emnlp-main.16 · Cited by 47 · cited 1×
“Other research has found “a tendency for LLM agents to conform to the model’s inherent social biases despite being directed to debate from certain political perspectives” [24].”
BackgroundAutoGPT+P: Affordance-based Task Planning with Large Language Models
Birr, T., Pohl, C., Younes, A., & Asfour, T. (2024) · Robotics: Science and Systems Conference · doi:10.15607/rss.2024.xx.112 · Cited by 47 · cited 4×
“AUTOGPT + P. AutoGPT + P (Planning) is a method that addresses reasoning limitations for agents that command robots in natural language [1].”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialLearning to Use Tools via Cooperative and Interactive AgentsPreprint
Shi, Z., Gao, S., Chen, X., Feng, Y., Yan, L., Shi, H., Yin, D., Ren, P., Verberne, S., & Ren, Z. (2024) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2403.03031 · Cited by 41 · cited 2×
“Other works focused on advancing agent patterns highlight that while breaking a larger problem into smaller subproblems can be effective at solving complex tasks, single agent patterns often struggle to complete the long sequence required [22, 6].”
BackgroundAgentVerse: Facilitating Multi-Agent Collaboration and Exploring Emergent Behaviors
Chen, W., Su, Y., Zuo, J., Yang, C., Yuan, C., Chan, C.-M., Yu, H., Lu, Y., Hung, Y.-H., Qian, C., et al. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2308.10848 · Cited by 39 · cited 5×
“Horizontal architectures are generally used for tasks where collaboration, feedback and group discussion are key to the overall success of the task [2].”
InfluentialEfficient Tool Use with Chain-of-Abstraction ReasoningPreprint
Gao, S., Dwivedi-Yu, J., Yu, P., Tan, X. E., Pasunuru, R., Golovneva, O., Sinha, K., Çelikyılmaz, A., Bosselut, A., & Wang, T. (2024) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2401.17464 · Cited by 39 · cited 1×
“Other works focused on advancing agent patterns highlight that while breaking a larger problem into smaller subproblems can be effective at solving complex tasks, single agent patterns often struggle to complete the long sequence required [22, 6].”
BackgroundDynamic Evaluation of Large Language Models by Meta Probing AgentsPreprint
Zhu, K., Wang, J., Zhao, Q., Xu, R., & Xie, X. (2024) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2402.14865 · Cited by 36 · cited 3×
“Emerging research indicates that there is significant data contamination in the model’s training data, supported by the observation that a model’s performance significantly worsens when benchmark questions are modified [8, 38, 37].”
BackgroundA psychometric framework for evaluating and shaping personality traits in large language models
Serapio-García, G., Safdari, M., Crepy, C., Sun, L., Fitz, S., Romero, P., Abdulhai, M., Faust, A., & Matarić, M. (2025) · Nature Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1038/s42256-025-01115-6 · Cited by 30
Time Travel in LLMs: Tracing Data Contamination in Large Language Models
Golchin, S., & Surdeanu, M. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2308.08493 · Cited by 29 · cited 1×
“Emerging research indicates that there is significant data contamination in the model’s training data, supported by the observation that a model’s performance significantly worsens when benchmark questions are modified [8, 38, 37].”
BackgroundGraph-enhanced Large Language Models in Asynchronous Plan ReasoningPreprint
Lin, F., Malfa, E. L., Hofmann, V., Yang, E. M., Cohn, A. G., & Pierrehumbert, J. B. (2024) · White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2402.02805 · Cited by 29 · cited 1×
“For example, Plan Like a Graph (PLaG) is an approach that represents plans as directed graphs, with multiple steps being executed in parallel [15, 33].”
BackgroundS3Eval: A Synthetic, Scalable, Systematic Evaluation Suite for Large Language ModelPreprint
Lei, F., Liu, Q., Huang, Y., He, S.-Z., Zhao, J., & Liu, K. (2023) · North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2310.15147 · Cited by 20 · cited 1×
“Researchers have also explored the idea of generating an entirely synthetic benchmark based on a user’s specific environment or use case [14, 27].”
BackgroundLanguage Agent Tree Search Unifies Reasoning Acting and Planning in Language Models
Zhou, A., Yan, K., Shlapentokh-Rothman, M., Wang, H., & Wang, Y.-X. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2310.04406 · Cited by 18 · cited 2×
“Language Agent Tree Search (LATS) is a single-agent method that synergizes planning, acting, and reasoning by using trees [36].”
BackgroundMethodWang, Z., Mao, S., Wu, W., Ge, T., Wei, F., & Ji, H. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2307.05300 · Cited by 11
Evil Geniuses: Delving into the Safety of LLM-based Agents
Tian, Y., Yang, X., Zhang, J., Dong, Y., & Su, H. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2311.11855 · Cited by 10 · cited 1×
“Moreover, agents have specifically been shown to be “less robust, prone to more harmful behaviors, and capable of generating stealthier content than LLMs, highlighting significant safety challenges” [25].”
BackgroundLiu, N., Chen, L., Tian, X., Zou, W., Chen, K., & Cui, M. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2401.02777 · Cited by 7 · cited 4×
“Figure 3: A diagram showing the RAISE method [16] specific and relevant feedback to the agent.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSmartPlay: A Benchmark for LLMs as Intelligent Agents
Wu, Y., Tang, X., Mitchell, T. M., & Li, Y. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2310.01557 · Cited by 6 · cited 1×
“Benchmarks like AgentBench and SmartPlay introduce objective evaluation metrics designed to evaluate the implementation’s success rate, output similarity to human responses, and overall efficiency [17, 30].”
BackgroundEmbodied LLM Agents Learn to Cooperate in Organized TeamsPreprint
Guo, X., Huang, K., Liu, J., et al. (2024) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2403.12482 · Cited by 6
Systematic Biases in LLM Simulations of Debates
Taubenfeld, A., Dover, Y., Reichart, R., et al. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2402.04049
AutoGPT+P: Affordance-based Task Planning with Large Language Models
Birr, T., Pohl, C., Younes, A., & Asfour, T. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2402.10778
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Wenting Zhao et al. "(InThe)WildChat: 570K ChatGPT Interaction Logs In The Wild". In: The Twelfth In- ternational Conference on Learning Representations. 2024. URL: https://openreview.net/forum?id= Bl8u7ZRlbM.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A Survey of Context Engineering for Large Language Models
Mei, L., Yao, J., Ge, Y., Wang, Y., Bi, B., Cai, Y., Liu, J., Li, M., Li, Z.-Z., Zhang, D., et al. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2507.13334 · Cited by 281
Agentic AI: a comprehensive survey of architectures, applications, and future directions
Ali, M. A., Dornaika, F., & Charafeddine, J. (2025) · Artificial Intelligence Review · doi:10.1007/s10462-025-11422-4 · Cited by 291
“This dual-axis taxonomy provides the unified lens necessary to rigorously analyze the field’s theoretical underpinnings, architectural innovations, and practical deployments.”
AI agents under threat: A survey of key security challenges and future pathways
Deng, Z., Guo, Y., Han, C., Ma, W., Xiong, J., Wen, S., & Xiang, Y. (2025) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3716628 · Cited by 210
“The literature [105] summarized the current AI agent architecture.”
AgenTracer: Who Is Inducing Failure in the LLM Agentic Systems?Preprint
Zhang, G.-M., Wang, J., Chen, J., Zhou, W., Wang, K., & Yan, S.-C. (2025) · International Conference on Learning Representations · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2509.03312 · Cited by 145
“…faculties, encompassing perception (Driess et al., 2023; Wang et al., 2024; Zheng et al., 2023; Wei et al., 2024), planning (Zhu et al., 2024; Erdogan et al., 2025; Huang et al., 2024), reasoning (Putta et al., 2024; Masterman et al., 2024), and action (Li et al., 2024; Yang et al., 2024).”
AutoML-Agent: A Multi-Agent LLM Framework for Full-Pipeline AutoMLPreprint
Trirat, P., Jeong, W., & Hwang, S. J. (2024) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2410.02958 · Cited by 91
“An example of prompt parsing process of an instruction-response pair { ( I i , R i ) } .”
Metadata
- Authors
- Masterman, T., Besen, S., Sawtell, M., & Chao, A.
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2024
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2404.11584
- OpenAlex
- W4394948161
- Cited by
- 35
- References
- 37
- Citations by year
- 2026: 16 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 4
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Licence
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI-based Problem Solving and Planning
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Multi-Agent Systems and Negotiation
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence Applications
- Keywords
- AI agents, agent architecture, multi-agent systems, single-agent systems, reasoning, planning, tool calling, agent communication, reflection
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
