From Debate to Equilibrium: Belief-Driven Multi-Agent LLM Reasoning via Bayesian Nash Equilibrium
This addresses efficiency and reliability issues in multi-agent LLM systems for AI researchers and practitioners, representing a novel method rather than an incremental improvement.
The paper tackles the computational cost and lack of convergence in multi-agent LLM reasoning by introducing ECON, a method that frames coordination as a Bayesian Nash equilibrium, achieving an 11.2% average improvement over existing approaches on six benchmarks.
Multi-agent frameworks can substantially boost the reasoning power of large language models (LLMs), but they typically incur heavy computational costs and lack convergence guarantees. To overcome these challenges, we recast multi-LLM coordination as an incomplete-information game and seek a Bayesian Nash equilibrium (BNE), in which each agent optimally responds to its probabilistic beliefs about the strategies of others. We introduce Efficient Coordination via Nash Equilibrium (ECON), a hierarchical reinforcement-learning paradigm that marries distributed reasoning with centralized final output. Under ECON, each LLM independently selects responses that maximize its expected reward, conditioned on its beliefs about co-agents, without requiring costly inter-agent exchanges. We mathematically prove that ECON attains a markedly tighter regret bound than non-equilibrium multi-agent schemes. Empirically, ECON outperforms existing multi-LLM approaches by 11.2% on average across six benchmarks spanning complex reasoning and planning tasks. Further experiments demonstrate ECON's ability to flexibly incorporate additional models, confirming its scalability and paving the way toward larger, more powerful multi-LLM ensembles. The code is publicly available at: https://github.com/tmlr-group/ECON.