EMNLP Findings2025
Enhancing Multi-Agent Debate System Performance via Confidence Expression
Zijie Lin, Bryan Hooi
Abstract
Generative Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable performance across a wide range of tasks. Recent research has introduced Multi-Agent Debate (MAD) systems, which leverage multiple LLMs to simulate human debate and thereby improve task performance. However, while some LLMs may possess superior knowledge or reasoning capabilities for specific tasks, they often struggle to clearly communicate this advantage during debates, in part due to a lack of confidence expression. Moreover, inappropriate confidence expression can cause agents in MAD systems to either stubbornly maintain incorrect beliefs or converge prematurely on suboptimal answers, ultimately reducing debate effectiveness and overall system performance. To address these challenges, we propose incorporating confidence expression into MAD systems to allow LLMs to explicitly communicate their confidence levels. To validate this approach, we develop ConfMAD, a MAD framework that integrates confidence expression throughout the debate process. Experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness of our method, and we further analyze how confidence influences debate dynamics, offering insights into the design of confidence-aware MAD systems.
Ask Lune
Ask anything. The answer quotes the paper.
Lune reads all of it and the papers around it, then shows you the passages behind every answer.
Lune answers from
the full paper · 2 top-tier papers that cite it · related work
Free to start. No credit card required.
Cited by top-tier papers2
- Epistemic Gain, Aleatoric Cost: Uncertainty Decomposition in Multi-Agent Debate for Math ReasoningDan Qiao, Binbin Chen, Fengyu Cai, Jianlong Chen et al.ICML 2026 · 3 citations
- When Embedding-Based Defenses Fail: Rethinking Safety in LLM-Based Multi-Agent SystemsLingxi Zhang, Guangtao Zheng, Hanjie ChenICML 2026 · 1 citation
Builds on19
- Measuring Massive Multitask Language UnderstandingDan Hendrycks, Collin Burns, Steven Basart, Andy Zou et al.ICLR 2021 · 7,905 citations
- CAMEL: Communicative Agents for "Mind" Exploration of Large Language Model SocietyGuohao Li, Hasan Hammoud, Hani Itani, Dmitrii Khizbullin et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 1,975 citations
- Improving Factuality and Reasoning in Language Models through Multiagent DebateYilun Du, Shuang Li, Antonio Torralba, Joshua B. Tenenbaum et al.ICML 2024 · 1,562 citations
- ChatEval: Towards Better LLM-based Evaluators through Multi-Agent DebateChi-Min Chan, Weize Chen, Yusheng Su, Jianxuan Yu et al.ICLR 2024 · 871 citations
- Can LLMs Express Their Uncertainty? An Empirical Evaluation of Confidence Elicitation in LLMsMiao Xiong, Zhiyuan Hu, Xinyang Lu, Yifei Li et al.ICLR 2024 · 867 citations
Related papers
- Demystifying Multi-Agent Debate: The Role of Confidence and DiversityXiaochen Zhu, Caiqi Zhang, Yizhou Chi, Tom Stafford et al.ACL Findings 2026 · 2 citations
- Debate or Vote: Which Yields Better Decisions in Multi-Agent Large Language Models?Hyeong Kyu Choi, Xiaojin Zhu, Sharon LiNeurIPS 2025 · 93 citations
- Free-MAD: Consensus-Free Multi-Agent DebateYu Cui, Hang Fu, Haibin Zhang, Licheng Wang et al.ACL Findings 2026 · 3 citations
- Multi-Agent Debate with Memory MaskingHongduan Tian, Xiao Feng, Ziyuan Zhao, Xiangyu Zhu et al.ICLR 2026 · 7 citations
- Encouraging Divergent Thinking in Large Language Models through Multi-Agent DebateTian Liang, Zhiwei He, Wenxiang Jiao, Xing Wang et al.EMNLP 2024 · 177 citations
