Kim Hammar, Tansu Alpcan, Emil C. Lupueess.SY cs.AI
Foundation models can improve their outputs through a self-refinement process driven by external feedback. In this process, the model is embedded in an iterative loop where it generates outputs, receives feedback from verifiers, and refines its responses through in-context learning. Following a novel approach, we formalize this process as an optimal stopping problem where the number of refinement iterations is decided based on expected improvement relative to cost. We derive optimal stopping policies and show that they can be efficiently computed through stochastic approximation. To evaluate our approach experimentally, we apply it to a coding benchmark for foundation models. The empirical results show that our stopping policies are significantly more cost-efficient than stopping policies proposed in prior work.
As foundation models grow in scale and diversity, coordinating multiple models into cooperative reasoning systems offers a path toward safer, more reliable AI. This chapter presents a multi-agent framework where solver models generate independent drafts, each undergoes structured critique and revision by a critic agent, and an aggregator agent synthesizes a final consensus solution. A scoring module provides semantic, numerical, and procedural evaluation across all agents. Through ablation studies on a benchmark spanning calculus, physics, chemistry, biology, economics, optimization, statistics, and mathematics, we isolate the contributions of framework architecture versus model diversity. We compare four configurations: (1) Individual Baseline, (2) Homogeneous Framework using one shared model, (3) Redundant Homogeneous Solvers using multiple instances of the same model, and (4) Heterogeneous Framework with diverse specialized models. Results show that while framework structure and redundant sampling yield modest gains, model heterogeneity is the critical factor driving substantial performance improvements. The heterogeneous configuration achieves superior step-wise accuracy (0.64 vs. 0.54 for individual models; 2.3x improvement over homogeneous configurations) with reduced variance across categories and difficulty levels. Step-wise reasoning quality (correctness of intermediate steps, not just final answers) improves dramatically only with model diversity, showing that heterogeneous agents provide complementary error detection and reasoning refinement essential for explainability and auditability. We discuss architectural principles, evaluation methodology, and implications for Global Applied AI, showing how heterogeneous multi-agent coordination supports transparent, auditable, high-confidence decision-making across scientific and industrial domains.
The power distribution network is critical to reliable electricity delivery, yet traditional inspection methods face limitations in semantic understanding, generalization, and closed-loop automation. To address these challenges, this paper proposes a Multi-Modal Agent framework specifically for power distribution defect detection. Central to this study is the systematic evaluation of multimodal foundation models as unified cognitive engines. We rigorously assess their integrated performance across three critical capabilities: (1) Perception, where the model must accurately identify equipment and generate expert-level descriptions of defects; (2) Reasoning, where the model interprets visual findings to diagnose causes, assess severity, and plan maintenance strategies based on domain knowledge; and (3) Tool Usage, where the model acts as an autonomous operator to execute actions -- such as querying knowledge bases or generating work orders -- to achieve closed-loop maintenance. To support this evaluation, a domain-specific evaluation dataset and a comprehensive benchmark are developed. Experimental results demonstrate the strengths and limitations of current foundation models in these three dimensions, providing empirical evidence for deploying autonomous agents in high-stakes industrial environments.