This study shows that multi-agent design is fundamentally an information-bottleneck optimization problem, and explains when bounded inter-agent communication helps or hurts, and observes that MAS consistently helps when relays are near-sufficient, especially for weaker models.
Abstract
LLM powered multi-agent systems (MAS) have emerged as a promising paradigm for complex tasks. However, their advantages over single-agent systems (SAS) remain unclear, with performance varying inconsistently across settings. Here, we provide an information bottleneck perspective on elucidating the differences between MAS and SAS. Specifically, our key observation is that a SAS accumulates its full reasoning trace in one shared context, while a MAS uses isolated local contexts connected by bounded relay messages. We show that, under infinite relay bandwidth, any SAS can be simulated by a MAS that transmits the full upstream context. Thus, the nontrivial advantage of MAS arises under bounded relays, where compression introduces a fundamental trade-off: reducing redundant context can improve efficiency, but may also incur loss of task-relevant information. We formalize this trade-off as an information bottleneck controlled by an effective parameter $\beta$, which captures how the balance shifts with model capability, and shows that MAS gains arise when context reduction outweighs relay information loss. We conduct 18 controlled experiments across five benchmarks and three model scales to validate our theoretical studies. We observe that MAS consistently helps when relays are near-sufficient, especially for weaker models. In contrast, MAS gains shrink or reverse when relays incur information loss, especially for stronger models that can already extract useful information from redundant context and thus gain little from compression. Our study shows that multi-agent design is fundamentally an information-bottleneck optimization problem. This perspective explains when bounded inter-agent communication helps or hurts.
The collaboration tax is formulated as the team-decentralisation loss of a two-player cooperative game with private information, with two propositions characterising its sign and its equivalence to a max-superadditivity violation.
Wei-Xiang Sun, Ze-Hong Wang, Hong Huang et al.· 2 citations
This work introduces a controlled and MAS-demanding diagnostic benchmark for representative MAS efficiency methods and shows that many reported gains are setup-dependent and may arise from structural collapse, disabled tool pathways, or starting systems where random pruning already preserves accuracy, rather than robus...
Jia-Mu Zhang, Ling-Xi Zhang, Peng-Jun Lu et al.· 2 citations
The results suggest that multi-agent performance depends less on the number of agents than on the information they exchange, and interaction helps only when agents share the right information at the right time.
Summer Eunhyung Ann, Haokun Liu, Chen-Hao Tan· 5 citations
This paper develops a multi-agent reinforcement learning-based (MARL) delegation training that enables agents to make sequential delegation decisions while minimizing the total execution cost and introduces two new frameworks for collaboration and delegation in multi-agent systems.
Ziqing Lu, Avinash Mudireddy, Sarra M. Alqahtani et al.· 0 citations
SAIGE, a lightweight multi-agent collaboration mechanism based on Semantic-Aware Incremental Graph Evolution, is proposed, suggesting that multi-agent superiority is bounded by task structure rather than universal, and that more agents do not necessarily make a system more intelligent.
Yizhen Yuan, Yi-Bo Wu, Yi-Han Zhang et al.· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.