34.1CRApr 14
To trust or not to trust: Attention-based Trust Management for LLM Multi-Agent SystemsPengfei He, Zhenwei Dai, Xianfeng Tang et al.
Large Language Model-based Multi-Agent Systems (LLM-MAS) have demonstrated strong capabilities in solving complex tasks but remain vulnerable when agents receive unreliable messages. This vulnerability stems from a fundamental gap: LLM agents treat all incoming messages equally without evaluating their trustworthiness. While some existing studies approach trustworthiness, they focus on a single type of harmfulness rather than analyze it in a holistic approach from multiple trustworthiness perspectives. We address this gap by proposing a comprehensive definition of trustworthiness inspired by human communication theory (Grice, 1975). Our definition identifies six orthogonal trust dimensions that provide interpretable measures of trustworthiness. Building on this definition, we introduce the Attention Trust Score (A -Trust), a lightweight, attention-based method for evaluating the trustworthiness of messages. We then develop a principled trust management system (TMS) for LLM -MAS that supports both message-level and agent-level trust assessments. Experiments across diverse multi-agent settings and tasks demonstrate that our TMS significantly improves robustness against malicious inputs.
CLMar 22, 2023
Are LLMs the Master of All Trades? : Exploring Domain-Agnostic Reasoning Skills of LLMsShrivats Agrawal
The potential of large language models (LLMs) to reason like humans has been a highly contested topic in Machine Learning communities. However, the reasoning abilities of humans are multifaceted and can be seen in various forms, including analogical, spatial and moral reasoning, among others. This fact raises the question whether LLMs can perform equally well across all these different domains. This research work aims to investigate the performance of LLMs on different reasoning tasks by conducting experiments that directly use or draw inspirations from existing datasets on analogical and spatial reasoning. Additionally, to evaluate the ability of LLMs to reason like human, their performance is evaluted on more open-ended, natural language questions. My findings indicate that LLMs excel at analogical and moral reasoning, yet struggle to perform as proficiently on spatial reasoning tasks. I believe these experiments are crucial for informing the future development of LLMs, particularly in contexts that require diverse reasoning proficiencies. By shedding light on the reasoning abilities of LLMs, this study aims to push forward our understanding of how they can better emulate the cognitive abilities of humans.