Multi-Agent Debate Strategies to Enhance Requirements Engineering with Large Language Models
Marc Oriol, Quim Motger, Jordi Marco, Xavier Franch

TL;DR
This paper explores the use of multi-agent debate strategies among large language models to improve the accuracy and robustness of requirements engineering tasks, moving beyond single-pass methods.
Contribution
It introduces a taxonomy of MAD strategies and demonstrates the feasibility of applying multi-agent debates to RE classification tasks.
Findings
Identified key characteristics of MAD strategies
Developed a taxonomy of MAD attributes
Preliminary evaluation shows MAD can enhance RE classification
Abstract
Context: Large Language Model (LLM) agents are becoming widely used for various Requirements Engineering (RE) tasks. Research on improving their accuracy mainly focuses on prompt engineering, model fine-tuning, and retrieval augmented generation. However, these methods often treat models as isolated black boxes - relying on single-pass outputs without iterative refinement or collaboration, limiting robustness and adaptability. Objective: We propose that, just as human debates enhance accuracy and reduce bias in RE tasks by incorporating diverse perspectives, different LLM agents debating and collaborating may achieve similar improvements. Our goal is to investigate whether Multi-Agent Debate (MAD) strategies can enhance RE performance. Method: We conducted a systematic study of existing MAD strategies across various domains to identify their key characteristics. To assess their…
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.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education · Topic Modeling · Multi-Agent Systems and Negotiation
