Harmanpreet Singh

Nikhil Verma, Manasa Bharadwaj, Wonjun Jang et al.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have redefined complex task automation with exceptional generalization capabilities. Despite these advancements, state-of-the-art methods rely on single-strategy prompting, missing the synergy of diverse reasoning approaches. No single strategy excels universally, highlighting the need for frameworks that fuse strategies to maximize performance and ensure robustness. We introduce the Select, Mix, and ReinvenT (SMaRT) framework, an innovative strategy fusion approach designed to overcome this constraint by creating balanced and efficient solutions through the seamless integration of diverse reasoning strategies. Unlike existing methods, which employ LLMs merely as evaluators, SMaRT uses them as intelligent integrators, unlocking the "best of all worlds" across tasks. Extensive empirical evaluations across benchmarks in reasoning, planning, and sequential decision-making highlight the robustness and adaptability of SMaRT. The framework consistently outperforms state-of-the-art baselines in solution quality, constraint adherence, and performance metrics. This work redefines LLM-driven decision-making by pioneering a new paradigm in cross-strategy calibration, unlocking superior outcomes for reasoning systems and advancing the boundaries of self-refining methodologies.

Jisoo Lee, Raeyoung Chang, Dongwook Kwon et al.

Multi-agent systems built on language models have shown strong performance on collaborative reasoning tasks. However, existing evaluations focus only on the correctness of the final output, overlooking how inefficient communication and poor coordination contribute to redundant reasoning and higher computational costs. We introduce GEMMAS, a graph-based evaluation framework that analyzes the internal collaboration process by modeling agent interactions as a directed acyclic graph. To capture collaboration quality, we propose two process-level metrics: Information Diversity Score (IDS) to measure semantic variation in inter-agent messages, and Unnecessary Path Ratio (UPR) to quantify redundant reasoning paths. We evaluate GEMMAS across five benchmarks and highlight results on GSM8K, where systems with only a 2.1% difference in accuracy differ by 12.8% in IDS and 80% in UPR, revealing substantial variation in internal collaboration. These findings demonstrate that outcome-only metrics are insufficient for evaluating multi-agent performance and highlight the importance of process-level diagnostics in designing more interpretable and resource-efficient collaborative AI systems.