MADRA: Multi-Agent Debate for Risk-Aware Embodied Planning
Junjian Wang, Lidan Zhao, Xi Sheryl Zhang

TL;DR
MADRA introduces a multi-agent debate framework using LLMs to improve safety assessment in embodied AI planning, reducing false rejections and enhancing task success without high computational costs.
Contribution
It presents a training-free, multi-agent debate approach for safety evaluation and a hierarchical planning framework, along with a new safety benchmark dataset.
Findings
Achieves over 90% rejection of unsafe tasks
Reduces false rejections compared to single-agent methods
Improves task success rates in virtual environments
Abstract
Ensuring the safety of embodied AI agents during task planning is critical for real-world deployment, especially in household environments where dangerous instructions pose significant risks. Existing methods often suffer from either high computational costs due to preference alignment training or over-rejection when using single-agent safety prompts. To address these limitations, we propose MADRA, a training-free Multi-Agent Debate Risk Assessment framework that leverages collective reasoning to enhance safety awareness without sacrificing task performance. MADRA employs multiple LLM-based agents to debate the safety of a given instruction, guided by a critical evaluator that scores responses based on logical soundness, risk identification, evidence quality, and clarity. Through iterative deliberation and consensus voting, MADRA significantly reduces false rejections while maintaining…
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
TopicsMultimodal Machine Learning Applications · Social Robot Interaction and HRI · AI-based Problem Solving and Planning
