Multi-Agent Systems (MAS) have recently moved from static workflows toward dynamically generated collaboration topologies. However, existing topology generation methods rely primarily on the parametric knowledge of large language models, with external search or retrieval used only as a reactive tool rather than an explicit determinant of collaboration structure. This leads to structure-knowledge misalignment, where systems exhibit redundant interactions or insufficient verification in knowledge-intensive tasks. We propose K-GAT (Knowledge-Guided Agent Topology Generator), a neuro-symbolic framework that formulates collaboration topology design as a knowledge-conditioned structure learning problem, integrating external evidence directly into autoregressive graph generation. Extensive experiments on knowledge-intensive benchmarks demonstrate K-GAT's efficiency and effectiveness: notably on the expert-level GPQA dataset, K-GAT outperforms the LLM-Debate baseline by a substantial margin of +15.7% in accuracy, while consuming less than half the computational tokens.
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly proposed for healthcare decision support, but their evaluations still reward single-answer accuracy rather than reasoning about interventions, mechanisms, harms, evidence, and uncertainty. We propose a reproducible, graph-centered evaluation framework for intervention-oriented LLM behavior in healthcare and stress-test it in a cardiovascular pilot. The framework has four components: (i) a domain causal knowledge graph in which assertions are first-class, provenance-preserving nodes with stable identifiers; (ii) a scenario-conditioned subgraph extraction step that, given any clinical scenario, retrieves the relevant reified-assertion subgraph; (iii) four controlled grounding conditions that vary how the retrieved subgraph is composed into the model's context (ungrounded C1, knowledge-graph C2, causal-graph C3, integrated C4); and (iv) an automated scoring pipeline, anchored on assertion identifiers, that computes intervention accuracy, and other evaluation measures on a single pass. To test the framework, we built a category-balanced scenario generator across eight reasoning failure modes and instantiated it on a cardiovascular graph. The metric panel discriminates conditions along interpretable, non-redundant axes: C4 obtains the strongest causal edge F1 (0.838), adverse-effect F1 (0.833), evidence accuracy (0.738), and unsupported claim rate (0.114), while C1 obtains the highest raw intervention accuracy (0.948) with no measurable causal or evidential grounding.
M. Danish Lim, I. Danial Bin Sharudin, Wen Han Chen +2cs.AI cs.SE
We study orchestration mechanisms for tool-using AI agents in realistic customer-service workflows over an unstructured knowledge base. We argue that declarative agents -- AI agents equipped with natural-language skill files appended to the system prompt -- are an effective orchestration paradigm. Concretely, we compare (i) a DeclarativeAgent that reads three domain-specific skill files at inference time and decides its own control flow, (ii) an ImperativeAgent based on a programmatic state machine with explicit phases, and (iii) an unscaffolded baseline agent modeled after the $τ$-Knowledge benchmark agent. Our ImperativeAgent is motivated by externalised-control inference as in Recursive Language Models and graph-based orchestration frameworks. We formalise the three agents as policy classes within a decentralised partially-observable Markov decision process and analyse their information-theoretic and structural properties; we then test the predicted differences empirically on five language models and two retrieval regimes. Our results show that retrieval quality is a dominant bottleneck for AI agents: when evidence is incomplete or skewed, all agents degrade substantially, and skill files cannot recover lost performance. Under high-quality retrieval, however, declarative skills consistently improve accuracy on procedural tasks and reduce orchestration errors, while the imperative state machine's brittleness does not reliably improve task success or compliance.
Causal language models factorize sequence probabilities using only preceding context, leaving future information unexploited during training despite its availability in the training data. This paper introduces Regret Pre-training, a self-supervised framework grounded in the Learning Using Privileged Information (LUPI) paradigm. The framework employs a dual-view architecture in which a single model generates both a causal Student distribution and a future-conditioned Teacher distribution. The training objective augments standard language modeling with a regret loss that minimizes the KL divergence from teacher to student, transferring future-aware signals to the causal representations. We investigate two teacher configurations on the OLMoE-1B-7B architecture:LocalRegret, which extends attention by one future token, andGlobalRegret, which conditions on bidirectional context with the target position masked. Experiments on nine downstream tasks following 4 billion tokens of training demonstrate that both configurations consistently outperform the baseline. On average,GlobalRegret andLocalRegret achieve 33.9% and 32.2% accuracy respectively, surpassing the baseline's 30.2%. Most notably,GlobalRegret improves BoolQ performance by 18.1 percentage points (61.0% vs 42.9%). The framework introduces no additional parameters and requires only one extra inference-mode forward pass per training step.