M ULTI -AGENT C OLLABORATION : H ARNESSING THE P OWER OF

I NTELLIGENT LLM AGENTS

Yashar Talebirad Amirhossein Nadiri

University of Alberta York University
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Toronto, Ontaria, Canada
talebira@ualberta.ca anadiri@yorku.ca
arXiv:2306.03314v1 [cs.AI] 5 Jun 2023

A BSTRACT
In this paper, we present a novel framework for enhancing the capabilities of large language models
(LLMs) by leveraging the power of multi-agent systems. Our framework introduces a collaborative
environment where multiple intelligent agent components, each with distinctive attributes and roles,
work together to handle complex tasks more efficiently and effectively. We demonstrate the practi-
cality and versatility of our framework through case studies in artificial general intelligence (AGI),
specifically focusing on the Auto-GPT and BabyAGI models. We also examine the "Gorilla" model,
which integrates external APIs into the LLM. Our framework addresses limitations and challenges
such as looping issues, security risks, scalability, system evaluation, and ethical considerations. By
modeling various domains such as courtroom simulations and software development scenarios, we
showcase the potential applications and benefits of our proposed multi-agent system. Our framework
provides an avenue for advancing the capabilities and performance of LLMs through collaboration
and knowledge exchange among intelligent agents.

1 Introduction

The field of artificial intelligence is rapidly advancing, bringing with it the complexity and challenges of deploying AI
models to manage an array of tasks. In response to these challenges, researchers are delving into multi-agent systems
where multiple AI entities collaborate towards a common goal [1]. One such multi-agent system can be seen in the
work of [2], who introduced generative agents that imitate plausible human behavior within an interactive sandbox
environment. Another instance of this exploration is Camel [3], in which a system is introduced which leverages a
Large Language Model (LLM) to generate diverse and detailed instructions for a wide range of tasks. It incorporates
role-playing scenarios where two agents interact, thereby demonstrating the potential of such systems in handling
complex real-world scenarios. In a similar vein, our paper proposes the use of multiple LLMs, each bearing diverse
characteristics, to enhance performance across a range of tasks.
We focus particularly on the recent iterations of the Generative Pretrained Transformer (GPT) models, GPT-4 and
GPT-3.5-turbo. From content creation and question-answering systems to language translation, GPT models have
manifested immense potential across a plethora of applications. Early experiments with GPT-4 [4] reinforces this
fact, showing GPT-4’s ability to solve complex tasks across diverse fields, approaching human-level performance.
As a result, the adeptness of these models at managing complex language tasks makes them ideal candidates for our
purposes. Moving forward, we will use the term “Intelligent Generative Agents” (IGAs) to refer to a series of agents,
each equipped with unique attributes and roles. GPT models, despite their commendable text generation capabilities,
operate as isolated entities in their conventional form. They lack the capability to collaborate with other agents or
draw from external knowledge repositories. This inherent shortcoming restricts their utility in complex scenarios that
necessitate collaborative efforts and information sharing among multiple intelligent systems.
Our proposed use of multiple IGAs stems from the notion that diversity in a system enhances performance. The idea is
based on the principle of division of labor, where each agent specializes in a specific function, thereby improving the
efficiency and effectiveness of the system as a whole. This mirrors the concept of teamwork in human systems, where
different individuals contribute their expertise to complete a task. A diverse set of agents, each configured with unique
strengths, can collectively handle a wider range of potential inputs, outputs, and processing strategies. Furthermore,
delegating different roles to each agent introduces more flexibility and efficiency in the context task management. This
brings about the concept of “multi-agent systems”, in which numerous IGAs interact and collaborate to achieve a shared
goal. These agents are capable of creating subtasks, seeking information, and soliciting assistance from each other, and
can also engage in competitive evaluation for better outcomes. The emphasis on collaboration and knowledge exchange
in multi-agent systems can bolster the problem-solving proficiency of GPT models, thereby paving the way for more
sophisticated intelligent systems. In fact, our proposed multi-agent system also aims to make strides toward achieving a
higher level of artificial general intelligence (AGI). The development and deployment of advanced generative AI models
like GPT-4, represent significant steps towards AGI [5]. By fostering collaboration and knowledge exchange among
multiple IGAs, our system seeks to further this progress. It aims to emulate the diverse and adaptable problem-solving
capabilities that are characteristic of an AGI, thereby pushing the boundaries of what AI can achieve.
Our proposed abstraction allows users to engage with a “black box” by providing an initial prompt and receiving the
final output without grappling with the underlying complexities of agent collaborations and interactions. Consider,
for instance, taking inspiration from the success of Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs), where two networks (a
generator and a discriminator) work collaboratively to produce better results, a simple yet effective multi-agent system
can be made utilizing two IGAs: One with memory and one with Internet access. By combining their strengths, these
agents could cooperate to reduce the occurrence of ’hallucinations’ or false information generation, thereby increasing
the reliability of the output [6]. This could be particularly beneficial in tasks where accuracy and fact-checking are
critical.
The objectives of this paper are to explore and demonstrate the potential of having multiple agents within a black box
environment for enhanced collaboration and problem-solving. The specific objectives are outlined as follows:

• Introducing a General Framework: The primary objective is to pave the way for the creation of more powerful
AGI models. By providing a general framework for multi-agent systems using LLMs, we aim to push
the boundaries of what AI can achieve, thereby contributing to the advancement toward Artificial General
Intelligence.

• Adaptive and Dynamic System: We introduce a system that is adaptive and can change itself to suit the tasks
at hand. Having a static structure will limit a system to a set of predefined tasks. The possibility of addition
and removal of agents in the system will make it flexible and capable of solving more complex problems.

• Multi-Agent Collaboration: In this paper, we explore the use of multiple LLMs in a collaborative manner.
This collaboration aims to enhance performance across diverse tasks, utilizing the strengths of each agent and
encouraging a synergistic relationship amongst them.

By effectively addressing these objectives, this paper aims to significantly advance the understanding and utilization of
multi-agent collaboration in the realm of IGAs. The exploration and demonstration of such a model of collaboration
serve as a stepping stone for future research in this domain.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows: We begin by laying the foundation of our discussion in Section 2,
where we introduce the essential components that make up the proposed framework. Following this, Section 3 provides
a comprehensive description of the proposed multi-agent framework and its functionalities. In Section 4, we explore
various potential use cases and applications of this framework, demonstrating its versatility and adaptability. Section 5
then discusses the potential challenges associated with our approach, shedding light on its limitations. We conclude our
discussion in Section 6, where we summarize the main points of our discussion, draw final conclusions, and suggest
directions for future research in this domain.

2 Building Blocks of the Multi-Agent System

The environment in which the multi-agent system operates can be considered a black box. This is due to the inherent
nature of IGAs, which are trained on vast amounts of data and generate outputs based on complex internal computations
that are not directly observable or interpretable. This black box environment is a digital workspace where multiple
instances of IGAs interact and collaborate. This workspace provides a shared platform for the agents to communicate,
exchange information, and perform tasks. Additionally, plugins can be used to provide additional functionality or
capabilities to agents. They can be seen as a specialized tool or service that agents can utilize to perform specific tasks
or access certain (internal or external) resources. Any of the agents or plugins can also be responsible with receiving the
initial prompt from the user or responding to the main user.

2
We denote the black box environment as a graph G(V, E), where V is the set of vertices representing the IGAs and
the plugins, and E is the set of edges representing the connection channels between the agents and the plugins, and
between the agents themselves.

2.1 Agent Representation

Each agent i ∈ V is represented as a tuple Ai = (Li , Ri , Si , Ci , Hi ), where:

• Li refers to the language model instance utilized by the agent. This encompasses the model’s type (such as
GPT-4 or GPT-3.5-turbo) and its specific configuration parameters, including the ’temperature’ setting which
influences the degree of randomness in the agent’s output. The choice of the language model can be dictated
by the task requirements. For instance, while GPT-4, due to its exceptional reasoning capabilities, could be
assigned tasks demanding deep insights and complex problem-solving, GPT-3.5-turbo could be employed for
tasks requiring quicker execution owing to its faster performance.
• Ri is the role of the agent. The role defines the responsibilities of the agent and provides the agent with a sense
of purpose and direction, guiding its actions and interactions. More specifically, these responsibilities are the
tasks or functions the agent is expected to carry out within the system. For instance, an agent’s responsibilities
could include processing and responding to user queries, coordinating interactions between other agents,
managing resources, or overseeing a particular aspect of the system’s operations.
• Si is the state of the agent, encompassing its current knowledge base and its "thoughts". The agent’s state
evolves over time based on the tasks it performs and the interactions it has with other agents or the environment.
– The “knowledge” component of the state can be seen as a representation of the agent’s current under-
standing or awareness of its environment, tasks, and interactions. It’s updated whenever the agent learns
new information or gains a new understanding.
– “Thoughts” in this context can be interpreted as the agent’s current focus or intent [7]. They represent
what the agent is currently contemplating or planning, based on its knowledge and the task at hand.
Thoughts may inform the agent’s next action and may be updated after each operation. They may also
encapsulate the agent’s internal dialogue or reasoning process as it works towards its goal.
• Ci is the boolean property indicating whether an agent has the ability to create new agents. By setting this
property to true, an agent can dynamically generate new agents within the system.
• Hi is the set of agents that this agent has the authority to halt. By specifying the agents that can be halted, an
agent can exercise control over the execution of other agents within the system.

2.2 Plugin Representation

Each plugin j ∈ V is represented as a tuple Pj = (Fj , Cj , Uj ), where:

• Fj is the set of the functionalities of the plugin, which are the actions that an agent can perform. This can
include accessing and manipulating digital resources within this environment, such as files and databases, and
interacting with external systems through APIs and other interfaces.
• Cj are the configurations associated with the plugin. Parameters are variables that are set when the plugin
is initialized. Examples include API keys for accessing specific services, or threshold values to determine
specific behavior. Parameters help in customizing the functionality of the plugin according to the task or
application at hand.
• Uj is the set of usage constraints or conditions that govern the usage of the plugin. These constraints define
the boundaries and capabilities of the plugin and can include limitations in terms of computational resources,
input data types, and output capabilities.

2.3 Connection and Message Representation

Each edge eij ∈ E connects an agent Ai to either a plugin Pj or another agent Aj using a communication channel.
Each agent can send messages through the channels that it is connected to, and each message m ∈ Mij , sent from agent
Ai to Aj , is represented as a tuple m = (Sm , Am , Dm ), where:

• Sm is the content of the message.

• Am is the action associated with the message, which can be a task assignment, a report, a request, or any other
action.

3
 • Dm is the metadata associated with the message, which can include information such as the timestamp, sender,
receiver, and potentially additional context-specific data.

Another approach to data transmission between agents can involve the use of plugins. For example, plugins designed
for data storage can serve as shared databases, enabling different agents to access and retrieve information stored by
other agents. Further extending this concept, a plugin could act as a communication board, enabling multi-directional
communication between multiple agents. This essentially forms a many-to-many communication platform within the
system.

3 Detailing Proposed Framework

In any multi-agent system, the nature of interaction and collaboration between the agents play a significant role in
determining the overall system performance. This section explores the ways in which these interactions can be managed
and optimized, particularly in the context of a system composed of multiple IGAs.

3.1 System Design

The design of a multi-agent system involves determining the number of agents, the required plugins, establishing
connections between agents and plugins, creating connections between agents to enable communication, and assigning
roles and properties of agents. This design aims to optimize the configuration and align it with the desired end goal of
the system, enabling efficient collaboration and interaction among the agents.
While designing the system, the following steps are taken:
• Agent Roles: Roles for the agents are identified and defined within the environment, based on the specific
requirements of the task at hand. Each agent is assigned a role, which specifies their responsibilities and duties
in the system.
• Agent-Plugin Connections: Connections between agents and plugins are established to provide agents with
additional functionality. By connecting agents to plugins, agents gain access to tools, resources, or external
services that enhance their capabilities. These connections allow agents to leverage the functionalities of the
plugins.
• Agent-Agent Connections: Connections between agents are created to enable communication and collaboration.
These connections allow agents to exchange messages, share information, and cooperate toward achieving the
common goal.
• System Operations: Agents can be granted specific permissions to create new agents or halt a specific set of
agents. Also, any of the plugins or agents can be responsible for receiving the initial prompt from the user or
responding to them.
By carefully designing the system with well-defined agents, plugins and the connections between them, the framework
enables efficient multi-agent interaction and collaboration. This design allows agents to effectively communicate,
coordinate, and work together towards achieving the common goal within the black box environment.

3.2 Dynamic Addition of Agents

In certain scenarios, an agent with the ability to create new agents may dynamically add additional agents to the system.
This capability enables agents to distribute their workload and assign specific responsibilities to enhance collaboration
and workload management. This need may arise as a byproduct of a sudden increase in the workload of the system.
When a new agent is created, the creator assigns the new agent a role, grants it the necessary properties, and establishes
connections with other agents and plugins. These properties and connections are subsets of those available to the creator
agent. Also, a connection to the creator is established.
Once the new agent is created and initialized, it operates independently within its defined role. The creator agent sets a
clear goal for the new agent, providing initial guidance to ensure a smooth transition of responsibilities. By allowing
agents to dynamically create new agents and delegate tasks, the system can effectively manage workloads, enhance
parallel processing capabilities, and improve overall system performance. This dynamic approach fosters a collaborative
environment where agents can dynamically organize and distribute tasks, ultimately contributing to the achievement of
the common goal.
The fact that a designer designed the system and defined the capabilities, connections, and permissions of the agents
does not contradict the dynamic addition of agents and their ability to distribute workload and delegate responsibilities.

4
Although the designer has designed the initial framework, the dynamic addition of agents allows for flexibility and
adaptation within the designed system. It empowers the agents themselves to make decisions and create new agents
based on their own assessments of workload and the need for assistance. The designer’s role is to provide the initial
structure and guidelines, but the system allows for agent autonomy and self-organization.
Hence, system design and the dynamic addition of agents function harmoniously. The initial framework laid out by the
designer serves as a robust foundation, while the agents’ ability to dynamically adapt and distribute workload ensures
flexibility and resilience under changing conditions and demands.

3.3 Feedback and Self-Feedback Mechanisms

Feedback mechanisms play a pivotal role in multi-agent systems, enabling agents to learn from their experiences and
adapt their strategies for improved performance. These mechanisms can be categorized into inter-agent feedback and
self-feedback [8, 9, 10]. Inter-agent feedback involves agents providing constructive criticism to each other based on
their interactions and collaborations. Such feedback can help agents identify areas of improvement and adapt their
strategies accordingly, enabling continuous learning and improvement within the system [8]. Some multi-agent systems
employ inter-agent feedback by involving agents into role-playing. This approach involves designing specific prompts
(denoted as Inception Prompting in [3]) to guide chat agents toward task completion while maintaining consistency
with the main goal. This approach can be integrated in the proposed model, giving different roles to multiple agents and
connecting them together.
Self-feedback, on the other hand, involves agents assessing their own performance and identifying areas of improvement.
This can be achieved through a self-assessment mechanism where agents evaluate their performance based on predefined
criteria or goals. This self-assessment can help agents identify their strengths and weaknesses, adapt their strategies,
and improve their problem-solving capabilities [9]. In the proposed model, self-feedback can be simulated by a pair
of connected agents: one with the role of giving feedback and the other tasked with refining the response based on
the feedback received. Note that this simulation removes the need for a human to ask for possible refinement of the
response.

3.4 Oracle Agent

An oracle agent is a unique type of agent in the system that operates in a stateless and memory-less manner. Unlike
other agents that may maintain a state or memory to guide their actions, an oracle agent performs actions based solely
on the current input it receives, without any regard for past inputs or outputs. This characteristic makes oracle agents
particularly useful in scenarios where the task at hand is independent of previous interactions or states.
Every interaction with an oracle agent is treated as an isolated event, independent of any previous interactions. This
makes oracle agents highly predictable, as their actions are solely determined by the current input and not influenced by
any past events. oracle agents are mainly designed to be utilized by other agents. For instance, an oracle agent can give
feedback on the response of the other agents, and let them refine their responses before proceeding.

3.5 Halting Mechanism and Supervision

The proposed framework incorporates an essential mechanism whereby an agent can halt other agents under certain
conditions. This capability is crucial for effective management and coordination of tasks within a multi-agent system.
Specifically, this ability can be granted to any agent in the system, including those that create new agents. The authority
to halt becomes inherently necessary for these parent agents to maintain control and ensure the proper functioning of
their created agents.
In practice, an agent halting another would involve signaling the targeted agent to cease its current activity. This
signaling could be in the form of a command or a message transmitted via the communication interfaces defined
within the system. Upon receiving this signal, the halted agent would immediately stop its current operation and wait
for further instructions. Depending upon the system design, it could either enter an idle state or undertake a default
operation in such instances. For creator agents and the agents they created, the halting mechanism works similarly. If a
creator agent identifies undesirable activity in its created agent, it can initiate the halt command, causing them to stop
their current operation immediately. This interaction emphasizes the supervisory role of the creator agent, ensuring that
created agent functions correctly and does not deviate from its intended role.
In fact, this supervisory role can be enhanced by the introduction of a specialized “Supervisor Agent”. This Supervisor
Agent can monitor the progress and task list of the main agent, providing timely feedback when necessary. For example,
if an agent is stuck in a loop or deviates from its assigned task, the Supervisor Agent can detect these issues by reviewing

5
recent activities. Upon such detection, the Supervisor Agent can initiate the halt command, prompting the main agent to
cease its current operation and change its course of action. This mechanism not only facilitates better task management
but also reduces the need for constant human monitoring and intervention in the feedback process.

3.6 Autonomous System Design

One notable aspect of the proposed framework is the potential role of an intelligent LLM as the system designer.
The unique capabilities of an IGA extend beyond being just an agent within the environment, as it possesses the
ability to fulfill the role of designing the system itself. It can consider the system’s objectives, constraints, and desired
functionalities to define the roles and responsibilities assigned to each agent. Additionally, the IGA can employ
its knowledge of communication protocols and collaborative frameworks to determine the optimal interactions and
connections between agents, plugins, and other system components. Drawing upon its comprehensive understanding
of the problem domain, combined with precise system formulation and specified objectives, the IGA can design an
effective system that optimally addresses the task at hand. Alternatively, after a human designs the initial system, an
IGA can analyze the system structure, roles, interactions, and connections, and provide feedback and refinement to
an already designed system. The IGA can also utilize its natural language generation capabilities to communicate the
system design to the system owners. It can provide clear and concise descriptions of the agents’ positions, roles, and
interactions, allowing for a comprehensive understanding of the system’s structure and functioning.

4 Use Cases and Applications

This section aims to demonstrate the practicality and versatility of the proposed multi-agent framework by examining
its applicability to existing AI models. We focus specifically on two cutting-edge artificial general intelligence (AGI)
models, Auto-GPT1 and BabyAGI2 , and examine how our framework could potentially enhance their design and
operation. We explore the models’ main components, their operation, and limitations, and how our framework could be
applied to improve their performance. Additionally, we discuss potential modifications that our framework can add,
thus offering a broader understanding of the potential applications and benefits of the proposed multi-agent system.

4.1 Artificial General Intelligence: Auto-GPT

Auto-GPT is an experimental open-source AI application that has been gaining significant attention due to its promising
autonomous abilities. It is considered a step towards AGI, a type of AI that can perform human-level intellectual tasks.
Auto-GPT has internet access, long-term and short-term memory management, GPT-4 for text generation, and file
storage and summarization with GPT-3.5. It can perform tasks that ChatGPT [11] can do, such as debugging code and
writing an email, but it can also complete more advanced tasks with fewer prompts. Auto-GPT’s design is based on the
concept of thoughts, which are essentially the steps it takes to complete a task.

4.1.1 Model
The framework on which Auto-GPT runs can be modeled using our proposed framework. We can consider the
Auto-GPT’s main agent as a single agent in our model. The agent’s goal is to perform tasks autonomously by chaining
thoughts together, while working towards the goals specified by the user. The state of the agent includes the current task
it is working on, and the chain of thoughts it has generated so far. This agent can also create other agents and halt any
of them. Plugins can be represented as external services or tools that the agent uses to perform its tasks. For example,
browsing the internet, managing memory, interacting with files, executing code, generating images, and similar tasks
can be identified as plugins in our framework. There will also be an oracle agent, which is responsible for tasks such as
summarization and criticizing the responses of the main agent. These plugins, along with the agents the main agent
creates, can all be considered as nodes in the graph corresponding to the system, and the connections between the
Auto-GPT agent and its plugins, along with the connections between the agent and the other agents it makes, can be
represented as edges in the graph. Messages sent through these connections may include task assignments, requests for
information, or commands to execute certain operations.

4.1.2 Limitations and Possible Improvements

Despite its potential, Auto-GPT faces several challenges and limitations. One significant obstacle is that it might get
stuck in a loop, rendering it unable to function properly. The looping issue is a result of the system’s reliance on chaining
1
https://github.com/Significant-Gravitas/Auto-GPT
2
https://github.com/yoheinakajima/babyagi

6
thoughts together to perform tasks. While this approach allows the system to perform complex tasks, it also makes it
prone to getting stuck in loops, especially when dealing with complex or ambiguous problems. However, features that
are proposed in our framework can possibly address this shortcoming, and open further avenues for improvements.
For instance, the agent’s inability to realize when it has got stuck or notice that it has gone off task can potentially be
mitigated by adding the “Supervisor Agent” that was introduced in Section 3.5.
As another example, one can implement a concept of co-agents, where multiple autonomous instances of Auto-GPT
could collaborate, share a workspace for files, and communicate in a board, essentially mimicking a team of humans
working remotely, with each having a specific role.
Additionally, the system’s ability to interact with files and execute code opens up a wide range of possibilities for its use,
but it also introduces potential security risks. These risks are possibly alleviated by having a human provide feedback
and authorizing each step, but this step is completely ignored when using the app’s “continuous” mode. This means that
the system should be designed with robust security measures in place to prevent unauthorized access or misuse. This
can be done using a state-less oracle agent, which can monitor each sensitive task and decide if it is indeed malicious or
not.

4.2 Artificial General Intelligence: BabyAGI

BabyAGI is an AI agent that can generate and attempt to execute tasks based on a given objective. BabyAGI operates
based on three LLM chains: Task creation chain, Task prioritization chain, and Execution chain.

4.2.1 Model
In our proposed framework, BabyAGI can be modeled as a system of interconnected agents, each with a specific role.
The agents in BabyAGI include a task creation agent, a task prioritization agent, and an execution agent. In addition
to these agents, BabyAGI uses a vector database to store and retrieve task results for context. This can be modeled
as a plugin in our framework that interacts with a vector database, with operations for storing and retrieving data.
Furthermore, there can be an additional agent in our framework that interacts with the user, refines the input, and places
it into the task storage.

4.2.2 Limitations and Possible Improvements

Our framework can potentially improve upon the current implementation of BabyAGI by providing a more structured
and modular approach to designing the system. By modeling each agent, plugin, and operation explicitly, our framework
can make it easier to understand and modify the system. Furthermore, our framework’s support for feedback loop can
enable the agents in BabyAGI to learn from their own performance and improve over time.

4.3 The “Gorilla” Model

4.3.1 Model
The Gorilla system [12] is based on a fine-tuned LLaMA [13] model with additional capabilities to retrieve documents
and integrate this information during both training and inference. It is capable of extending beyond mere language
modelling, embracing features that enable interaction with external APIs, handling document retrieval, and adaptation
to version changes. In this system, API calls and their documentation are used to instruct the LLM about the specific
tasks each API can handle. The model learns to map prompts to API calls by using a retrieval system to access the most
up-to-date API documentation from the database. Gorilla also mitigates hallucination and adapts to changes in API
documentation by using a retriever during training and inference.
In our framework, we need a single agent to model the Gorilla system. To handle APIs, our model can employ plugins,
which can be seen as extensions or modules designed to handle specific tasks. This results in enhanced flexibility and
versatility in the system that allows it to handle a broader range of tasks.

4.3.2 Limitations and Possible Improvements

Although integrating information during both training and inference shows significant improvements over GPT-4 in
writing API calls, our model offers a more generalized and robust framework that can be customized to different use
cases. For example, our model can handle real-time updates to APIs and their documentation more efficiently by
updating the relevant agent’s knowledge base, rather than having to update the entire model. Additionally, it can handle
overlapping functionality between different APIs more elegantly by deciding between different agents based on their
functionality.

7
Our model can also potentially improve the process of mitigating hallucinations by using a dedicated agent for this task.
This agent could verify the main agent’s responses to find out when the agent is hallucinating and intervene to correct
the output.
Our model can further improve the process of interacting with APIs by employing different agents for different APIs,
each equipped with its plugin for the relevant API documentation. This would allow our model to handle more complex
tasks and interactions, as it can leverage the combined capabilities of multiple agents at once.

4.4 Case Study

In this section, we will delve into two distinct case studies to illustrate the practical applications of our proposed
multi-agent system. These case studies, namely a court simulation and a software development scenario, have been
chosen due to their inherent complexity and the necessity for diverse roles and interactions within them. Both scenarios
involve a multitude of tasks and responsibilities that need to be coordinated effectively for successful outcomes. By
employing our multi-agent framework, we aim to demonstrate how such complex processes can be modeled in a
common framework. Each agent in the system will be assigned a specific role, mirroring the real-world roles in these
scenarios. They will be equipped with the necessary tools and capabilities to fulfill their responsibilities, thereby
contributing to the overall objective.

4.4.1 Court Simulation

Before the introduction of new LLMs, attempts to simulate environments like a courtroom required training with
specific data [14]. However, with the recent advancements in the area of language models, the training process might
not be necessary anymore. In this context, our framework can be utilized to model the various roles and interactions that
take place within a courtroom. This includes the roles of the judge, jury, attorneys, witnesses, and even the court clerk.
Each of these roles can be represented by an agent within the system, with specific responsibilities and capabilities
assigned to them.

• Judge Agent: The Judge Agent is responsible for overseeing the proceedings, making rulings on legal issues,
and ultimately delivering the verdict in non-jury trials. This agent would require a plugin that provides access
to a comprehensive database of legal knowledge and precedents, enabling it to make informed decisions.
• Jury Agent: The Jury Agent is responsible for determining the facts of the case and delivering a verdict in
jury trials. This agent would require a plugin that allows it to understand and evaluate the evidence presented
during the trial.
• Attorney Agents: The Attorney Agents represent the prosecution and the defence in the trial. They are
responsible for presenting their respective cases, cross-examining witnesses, and making closing arguments.
These agents would require plugins that provide access to legal knowledge, as well as plugins that enable them
to understand and generate persuasive arguments.
• Witness Agents: The Witness Agents provide testimony during the trial. They would require plugins that
allow them to accurately recall and describe events.
• Court Clerk Agent: The Court Clerk Agent is responsible for administrative tasks such as maintaining
court records and administering oaths. This agent would require plugins that enable it to manage and retrieve
documents, as well as plugins that allow it to perform its administrative duties.

The interactions between these agents would be governed by a set of predefined rules and protocols, simulating the
procedures followed in a real courtroom. For instance, the Judge Agent could issue instructions to the other agents,
the Attorney Agents could question the Witness Agents, and the Jury Agent could request clarification or additional
information from any of the other agents.
In terms of operations, the simulation process would proceed in stages, similar to a real trial. The Attorney agents
would present their opening statements, followed by the presentation of evidence and witness testimony. The Jury
Agent would then deliberate and deliver a verdict, after which the Judge Agent would conclude the proceedings.
This simulation could be used for a variety of purposes, such as training for law students, testing new legal theories, or
even automating certain aspects of the legal process. However, it’s important to note that while our framework can
simulate the process and interactions in a courtroom, it cannot fully replicate the complexities of human decision-making
and judgement. Therefore, any outcomes produced by the simulation should be interpreted with caution.

8
4.4.2 Software Development
Our model can be effectively used in the context of software development, enabling the creation of a multi-agent
system where each agent embodies a specific role integral to the software development process. By assigning distinct
responsibilities to individual agents, the development process can be significantly optimized and streamlined. The key
roles, as derived from the software development team structure, can be represented as follows:

• User Experience Designer: This agent is responsible for understanding and designing the user experience. It
can use a plugin that simulates user interactions to test different designs and gather data on user preferences.
The agent can then use this data to refine the design.
• Product Manager: The Product Manager is responsible for understanding the needs of the users and defining
the product’s features accordingly. It can use a plugin that collects and analyzes user feedback to understand
what features are most important to the users. This agent can also interact with the User Experience Designer
Agent to ensure that the product’s design aligns with the users’ needs.
• Software Architect: The Software Architect Agent is responsible for designing the software’s architecture. It
can use a plugin that simulates different architectural designs to test their performance and scalability. This
agent can also interact with the Software Developer Agent to ensure that the architecture is implemented
correctly.
• Software Developer: The Software Developer is responsible for writing the code that implements the
software’s features. It can use a plugin that provides access to a code repository to store and manage the
code. This agent can also interact with the Software Architect Agent to ensure that the code aligns with the
architecture.
• Software Tester: The Software Tester is responsible for testing the software to ensure that it works correctly.
It can use a plugin that automates the testing process, running a suite of tests on the code and reporting any
failures. This agent can also interact with the Software Developer Agent to help identify and fix any bugs in
the code.
• User Interface Designer: The User Interface Designer is responsible for designing the software’s user
interface. It can use a plugin that simulates user interactions to test different designs and gather data on user
preferences. This agent can then use this data to refine the design.
• Debugger: The Debugger is responsible for identifying and fixing bugs in the code. It can use a plugin that
provides debugging tools to help identify the cause of any bugs. This agent can also interact with the Software
Developer Agent to help fix the bugs.
• Oracle Agent: The oracle agent in this context can be used to provide feedback on the overall software
development process. It can assess the performance of the other agents and provide feedback to help them
improve. For example, it might suggest that the Software Developer Agent needs to write more efficient code,
or that the User Experience Designer Agent needs to consider a different design approach.

In this way, our model can be used to utilize a more efficient and effective software development process. By assigning
specific roles to each agent and using plugins to enhance their capabilities, we can create a system that is capable of
automating the development process of a high-quality software, based on the user’s needs.

5 Challenges and Limitations

Multi-agent systems, by their very nature, are complex entities. They involve the interaction of multiple autonomous
agents, each with its own capabilities and objectives. This complexity, while being a source of the system’s strength,
also gives rise to a host of challenges and limitations. In the following subsections, we will explore some of these
challenges, shedding light on the potential hurdles that need to be overcome in the context of multi-agent systems.

5.1 Challenges of a Dynamic System

The dynamic addition of agents, while offering the potential for enhanced flexibility and adaptability, also presents
several challenges. One of the primary concerns is the risk of over-proliferation of agents, which could lead to resource
exhaustion or inefficiencies in the system. To mitigate this risk, the system needs to incorporate mechanisms to monitor
and control the creation of new agents.
Specifically, the system needs to employ a resource management module that tracks the computational resources
consumed by each agent and the system as a whole. This module can alert the system when resource usage approaches

9
a predefined threshold, triggering measures to prevent resource exhaustion. These measures could include halting the
creation of new agents.
In addition to resource management, the system also needs to ensure that the dynamic addition of agents does not lead
to inefficiencies or conflicts. This is achieved through a coordination mechanism that oversees the assignment of roles
and tasks to the agents. When a new agent is created, this mechanism ensures that its role and tasks do not overlap
significantly with those of existing agents, thereby preventing redundancies and potential conflicts.

5.2 Scalability

Scalability is another significant challenge in multi-agent systems. As the system grows in size and complexity,
maintaining the performance and efficiency of the system can become increasingly difficult. The computational
resources required for managing the interactions and operations of a large number of agents can be substantial.
Additionally, as the number of agents increases, the potential for conflicts and inconsistencies also increases, which can
further impact the performance of the system.

5.3 System Evaluation

Evaluating the performance of a multi-agent system can be challenging due to the complexity and diversity of the
tasks that the system can handle. Traditional evaluation metrics might not be sufficient or appropriate for assessing
the performance of the system. Therefore, new evaluation metrics and methodologies might need to be developed to
accurately measure the performance of the system and its individual agents.

5.4 Ethical Considerations

The use of multi-agent systems also raises several ethical considerations. For instance, the system might make decisions
or take actions that have significant impacts on individuals or society. Therefore, it is crucial to ensure that the system
operates in an ethical manner and that it respects the rights and interests of all users. This requires careful design and
oversight of the system, as well as the implementation of appropriate ethical guidelines and safeguards.

6 Conclusion
In this paper, we proposed a novel framework for enhancing the performance and capabilities of LLMs by leveraging
the power of multi-agent systems. Our framework introduces a black box environment where multiple IGAs, each
with unique attributes and roles, collaborate to handle complex tasks more efficiently and effectively. By introducing
collaboration and knowledge exchange among these agents, our system seeks to push the boundaries of what AI can
achieve, potentially paving the way towards achieving a higher level of AGI.
Despite the potential benefits, the proposed framework also presents several challenges and limitations, including issues
related to security and privacy, agent design and training, system evaluation, and ethical considerations. Addressing these
challenges will require further research and development, as well as careful consideration of the ethical implications of
deploying such systems. Another promising direction for future work could involve the use of the proposed framework
to specific use cases or domains. For instance, the framework could be adapted to handle complex tasks in areas such
as healthcare, finance, education, or transportation. This could provide valuable insights into the practical utility and
potential impact of the proposed framework.

References
[1] David Dohan, Winnie Xu, Aitor Lewkowycz, Jacob Austin, David Bieber, Raphael Gontijo Lopes, Yuhuai Wu,
Henryk Michalewski, Rif A. Saurous, Jascha Sohl-dickstein, Kevin Murphy, and Charles Sutton. Language model
cascades, 2022.
[2] Joon Sung Park, Joseph C. O’Brien, Carrie J. Cai, Meredith Ringel Morris, Percy Liang, and Michael S. Bernstein.
Generative agents: Interactive simulacra of human behavior, 2023.
[3] Guohao Li, Hasan Abed Al Kader Hammoud, Hani Itani, Dmitrii Khizbullin, and Bernard Ghanem. Camel:
Communicative agents for "mind" exploration of large scale language model society, 2023.
[4] Sébastien Bubeck, Varun Chandrasekaran, Ronen Eldan, Johannes Gehrke, Eric Horvitz, Ece Kamar, Peter Lee,
Yin Tat Lee, Yuanzhi Li, Scott Lundberg, Harsha Nori, Hamid Palangi, Marco Tulio Ribeiro, and Yi Zhang. Sparks
of artificial general intelligence: Early experiments with gpt-4, 2023.

10
 [5] Chaoning Zhang, Chenshuang Zhang, Chenghao Li, Yu Qiao, Sheng Zheng, Sumit Kumar Dam, Mengchun
Zhang, Jung Uk Kim, Seong Tae Kim, Jinwoo Choi, Gyeong-Moon Park, Sung-Ho Bae, Lik-Hang Lee, Pan Hui,
In So Kweon, and Choong Seon Hong. One small step for generative ai, one giant leap for agi: A complete survey
on chatgpt in aigc era, 2023.
[6] Yejin Bang, Samuel Cahyawijaya, Nayeon Lee, Wenliang Dai, Dan Su, Bryan Wilie, Holy Lovenia, Ziwei Ji,
Tiezheng Yu, Willy Chung, Quyet V. Do, Yan Xu, and Pascale Fung. A multitask, multilingual, multimodal
evaluation of chatgpt on reasoning, hallucination, and interactivity, 2023.
[7] Jason Wei, Xuezhi Wang, Dale Schuurmans, Maarten Bosma, Brian Ichter, Fei Xia, Ed Chi, Quoc Le, and Denny
Zhou. Chain-of-thought prompting elicits reasoning in large language models, 2023.
[8] Yao Fu, Hao Peng, Tushar Khot, and Mirella Lapata. Improving language model negotiation with self-play and
in-context learning from ai feedback, 2023.
[9] Xinyun Chen, Maxwell Lin, Nathanael Schärli, and Denny Zhou. Teaching large language models to self-debug,
2023.
[10] Aman Madaan, Niket Tandon, Prakhar Gupta, Skyler Hallinan, Luyu Gao, Sarah Wiegreffe, Uri Alon, Nouha
Dziri, Shrimai Prabhumoye, Yiming Yang, Shashank Gupta, Bodhisattwa Prasad Majumder, Katherine Hermann,
Sean Welleck, Amir Yazdanbakhsh, and Peter Clark. Self-refine: Iterative refinement with self-feedback, 2023.
[11] OpenAI. Introducing chatgpt. https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt, 2022. Accessed: 2023-06-04.
[12] Shishir G. Patil, Tianjun Zhang, Xin Wang, and Joseph E. Gonzalez. Gorilla: Large language model connected
with massive apis, 2023.
[13] Hugo Touvron, Thibaut Lavril, Gautier Izacard, Xavier Martinet, Marie-Anne Lachaux, Timothée Lacroix,
Baptiste Rozière, Naman Goyal, Eric Hambro, Faisal Azhar, et al. Llama: Open and efficient foundation language
models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.13971, 2023.
[14] Sil Hamilton. Blind judgement: Agent-based supreme court modelling with gpt, 2023.

11