Multi-agent Scaling Across Disjunctive and Compensatory Tasks

Source facts

The preprint introduces a taxonomy of group tasks and analyzes multi-agent LLM scaling on disjunctive and compensatory tasks. Across 13 open-weight models and teams of up to 30 agents, the abstract reports that disjunctive-task potential from larger teams is mostly missed by direct plurality voting, while multi-round revision raises accuracy with little difference between one peer and 29 peers. For Fermi estimation, shared item-level bias accounts for about 87% of squared error and averaging reduces error by about 6%.

Analysis

The work argues that team size is not a sufficient design variable: task structure and the output-combination mechanism determine whether additional agents help.

Uncertainty/Doubt

• This is an arXiv preprint. The benchmark selection, model independence assumptions, and generality beyond the tested tasks were not independently audited here.