DynaDebate: Breaking Homogeneity in Multi-Agent Debate with Dynamic Path Generation
Zhenghao Li, Zhi Zheng, Wei Chen, Jielun Zhao, Yong Chen, Tong Xu, Enhong Chen

TL;DR
DynaDebate introduces a dynamic multi-agent debate framework that generates diverse reasoning paths and emphasizes process critique, significantly improving collaborative decision-making in large language model-based systems.
Contribution
It proposes a novel approach with dynamic path generation, process-centric debate, and trigger-based verification to overcome homogeneity and enhance multi-agent reasoning.
Findings
Outperforms existing MAD methods on multiple benchmarks.
Achieves more diverse and logical reasoning paths.
Reduces errors caused by homogeneous reasoning.
Abstract
Recent years have witnessed the rapid development of Large Language Model-based Multi-Agent Systems (MAS), which excel at collaborative decision-making and complex problem-solving. Recently, researchers have further investigated Multi-Agent Debate (MAD) frameworks, which enhance the reasoning and collaboration capabilities of MAS through information exchange and debate among multiple agents. However, existing approaches often rely on unguided initialization, causing agents to adopt identical reasoning paths that lead to the same errors. As a result, effective debate among agents is hindered, and the final outcome frequently degenerates into simple majority voting. To solve the above problem, in this paper, we introduce Dynamic Multi-Agent Debate (DynaDebate), which enhances the effectiveness of multi-agent debate through three key mechanisms: (1) Dynamic Path Generation and Allocation,…
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
TopicsMulti-Agent Systems and Negotiation · AI-based Problem Solving and Planning · Logic, Reasoning, and Knowledge
