Encouraging Divergent Thinking in Large Language Models through Multi-Agent Debate
Tian Liang, Zhiwei He, Wenxiang Jiao, Xing Wang, Yan Wang, Rui Wang,, Yujiu Yang, Shuming Shi, Zhaopeng Tu

TL;DR
This paper introduces a Multi-Agent Debate framework to promote divergent thinking in large language models, addressing the Degeneration-of-Thought problem and improving reasoning on complex tasks.
Contribution
The paper proposes a novel MAD framework that encourages divergent thinking in LLMs through multi-agent debate, overcoming reflection limitations.
Findings
MAD improves performance on commonsense translation and arithmetic reasoning.
Adaptive debate breaks enhance the effectiveness of MAD.
Using different LLMs as judges affects fairness and outcomes.
Abstract
Modern large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT have shown remarkable performance on general language tasks but still struggle on complex reasoning tasks, which drives the research on cognitive behaviors of LLMs to explore human-like problem-solving strategies. Along this direction, one representative strategy is self-reflection, which asks an LLM to refine the solution with the feedback generated by itself iteratively. However, our study shows that such reflection-style methods suffer from the Degeneration-of-Thought (DoT) problem: once the LLM has established confidence in its solutions, it is unable to generate novel thoughts later through reflection even if its initial stance is incorrect. To address the DoT problem, we propose a Multi-Agent Debate (MAD) framework, in which multiple agents express their arguments in the state of "tit for tat" and a judge manages the debate process…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Code & Models
Videos
Taxonomy
TopicsTopic Modeling · Natural Language Processing Techniques · Multimodal Machine Learning Applications
