Enterprise DNAEnterprise DNA

Agents

Llm Multiagent Debate

ICML 2024: Improving Factuality and Reasoning in Language Models through Multiagent Debate

Our verdict

Not reviewed yet

We have not reviewed Llm Multiagent Debate yet

No one at Enterprise DNA has checked this listing against its sources. The description comes from public listings gathered automatically. Any fact below shows where it came from and when it was last checked.

How we review records

From the listing

About Llm Multiagent Debate

Implements a multiagent debate system where multiple language model instances argue for their answers, then converge on a more factual and reasoned final response. Based on the ICML 2024 paper 'Improving Factuality and Reasoning in Language Models through Multiagent Debate'. Provides Python scripts to orchestrate debates between model instances.

Best for

Researchers and developers exploring debate-based self-correction for LLMs

Use cases

  • Improving answer factualness for LLM outputs
  • Reducing hallucination in generated text
  • Enhancing reasoning accuracy via iterative debate

Notes

543 stars on GitHub. Last updated 2025-04-24.

Pros

  • Straightforward implementation of a proven academic method
  • Open-source and community-supported
  • Modular design allows customization of debate rounds and models

Cons

  • Requires multiple API calls per query increasing cost
  • Relies on the quality of base models debates
  • No official maintainer or commercial support

Key facts

What we have checked

Days since the last commit
549
Checked GitHub
GitHub forks
85
Checked GitHub
GitHub stars
556
Checked GitHub
Days to a first reply on issues
0.4
Checked GitHub
Open issues
8
Checked GitHub
Releases in the last 90 days
0
Checked GitHub

Each value shows when we last confirmed it and where it came from. Values we have not confirmed are left out, never guessed.

Health and security

Is Llm Multiagent Debate looked after, and what do its setup files show

Health score

44 out of 100

Does someone look after this repository? It does not say the code is good or safe. Worked out from GitHub signals checked . How it is worked out

PartPointsWhat we saw
Recent activity0 of 30Last push 549 days ago
Releases0 of 150 releases in 90 days
Issue replies20 of 20First reply in 0.4 days (median)
Maintainer15 of 15Owned by an organisation
Official sourceNot countedMCP servers only

Alternatives

Alternatives to Llm Multiagent Debate

RecordTypeHow we knowChecked
chatarenaAlternative to thisAgentNamed in the listingNot dated
harrison/ai-counselAlternative to thisMCP serverNamed in the listingNot dated
Hugging FaceAlternative to thisAgentNamed in the listingNot dated
spyrae/claude-conciliumAlternative to thisMCP serverNamed in the listingNot dated
WestworldAlternative to thisAgentNamed in the listingNot dated
AutoGenThis is an alternative to itAppNamed in the listingNot dated
ChatDevThis is an alternative to itAgentNamed in the listingNot dated
CrewaiThis is an alternative to itAgentNamed in the listingNot dated

Compare

Compare Llm Multiagent Debate side by side

Sources

Where this comes from

  • GitHubRegistry

    Checked · Days since the last commit, GitHub forks, GitHub stars, Days to a first reply on issues, Open issues, Releases in the last 90 days

A source shows what was published when we checked it. It does not certify security, performance or a working installation. Read our method.

Changelog

What changed

No changes recorded yet. Releases, price changes and deprecations appear here, with their dates, once we track them for this record.

Free 27-page guide

Get the free Developer’s Field Guide

A 27-page field guide to the AI coding workflow with Claude. Claude Code, MCP servers, the prompt patterns that work, and what to delegate. Free.

Enter your work email. We send it straight over, plus a few short notes worth knowing. Unsubscribe any time.

No spam. Unsubscribe any time.