Luoxi Tang

Yuqiao Meng, Luoxi Tang, Dazheng Zhang et al.

The rapid adoption of large language models (LLMs) in digital health has been driven by a "scaling-first" philosophy, i.e., the assumption that clinical intelligence increases with model size and data. However, real-world clinical needs include not only effectiveness, but also reliability and reasonable deployment cost. Since clinical decision-making is inherently collaborative, we challenge the monolithic scaling paradigm and ask whether a Small Agent Group (SAG) can support better clinical reasoning. SAG shifts from single-model intelligence to collective expertise by distributing reasoning, evidence-based analysis, and critical audit through a collaborative deliberation process. To assess the clinical utility of SAG, we conduct extensive evaluations using diverse clinical metrics spanning effectiveness, reliability, and deployment cost. Our results show that SAG achieves superior performance compared to a single giant model, both with and without additional optimization or retrieval-augmented generation. These findings suggest that the synergistic reasoning represented by SAG can substitute for model parameter growth in clinical settings. Overall, SAG offers a scalable solution to digital health that better balances effectiveness, reliability, and deployment efficiency.

Luoxi Tang, Rupali Rajendra Vaje, Yuqiao Meng et al.

Agentic memory enables LLMs to persist information beyond a single context window and reuse it in later decisions, but it also introduces a new vulnerability: spurious correlations, where retrieved memory carries miscorrelated evidence and propagates erroneous reasoning into downstream decisions. Despite the widespread use of agentic memory, this risk remains largely underexplored. We address it from two aspects. First, we benchmark several canonical types of spurious patterns identified through causal structure and record them across trajectory-level memory. Diagnosing agentic memory systems on this benchmark reveals that memory improves reasoning on clean inputs but amplifies reliance on spurious patterns when they are present. Second, we propose CAMEL, a plug-and-play calibration method that operates across diverse memory architectures at both write and retrieval time. CAMEL consistently reduces reliance on spurious patterns across all three types while preserving or improving performance on clean inputs and staying robust under adaptive attacks targeting the calibration. Overall, CAMEL offers a principled and lightweight solution toward more reliable agentic memory deployment.

Luoxi Tang, Yuqiao Meng, Joseph Costa et al.

Multi-agent debate (MAD) systems improve LLM reasoning through iterative deliberation, but remain vulnerable to debate collapse, a failure type where final agent decisions are compromised on erroneous reasoning. Existing methods lack principled mechanisms to detect or prevent such failures. To address this gap, we first propose a hierarchical metric that quantifies behavioral uncertainty at three levels: intra-agent (individual reasoning uncertainty), inter-agent (interactive uncertainty), and system-level (output uncertainty). Empirical analysis across several benchmarks reveals that our proposed uncertainty quantification reliably indicates system failures, which demonstrates the validity of using them as diagnostic metrics to indicate the system failure. Subsequently, we propose a mitigation strategy by formulating an uncertainty-driven policy optimization to penalize self-contradiction, peer conflict, and low-confidence outputs in a dynamic debating environment. Experiments demonstrate that our proposed uncertainty-driven mitigation reliably calibrates the multi-agent system by consistently improving decision accuracy while reducing system disagreement.