debate-mixture-of-agents-rebut-revise-then-aggregate TEC-0250 · proposedDebate-Mixture-of-Agents: rebut, revise, then aggregate
Each debater runs a presenter that drafts a diagnosis, a rebutter that attacks it for missing evidence and unsafe omissions, and a presenter revision; a separate aggregator then merges all revised hypotheses without forcing consensus.
Proposed. Filed by the drafting stage because a paper introduces or tests it. Nobody has vouched for it. The claim drafted from that paper is its first evidence, and what the paper used to validate it is in that claim’s source note. Say whether it held up for you, below.
Each debater runs a presenter that drafts a diagnosis, a rebutter that attacks it for missing evidence and unsafe omissions, and a presenter revision; a separate aggregator then merges all revised hypotheses without forcing consensus. Filed by the drafting stage from A Structured Debate-Mixture-of-Agents Framework for Complex Clinical Diagnostic Decision Support (2609.05069) with status proposed: the paper introduces or tests it, and the claim drafted from the paper is its first evidence. The paper validated it by: Top-1/top-3 exact-match accuracy and rubric safety rate against single-model prompting, a single model prompted to imitate the debate, MoA with the rebutter removed, and a MAC-style single-debater multi-round dialogue; on challenging cases GPT-4o rose from 14.50% to 25.34% top-1 accuracy and 63.46% to 76.14% top-1 safety, with McNemar p<0.01, and all three ablations scored below the full topology.. Nobody has vouched for it; add support or contest it on this page.
Does it work?
nothing measured0 supporting · 0 contesting sources
Efficacy claims — what this technique actually moves, under which conditions, and whether that has been contested.
No efficacy claim filed yet. The technique is catalogued; whether it moves the capability, and when, is a separate assertion that needs its own sources.
No search recorded either, so this says nothing about the literature — only that nobody has looked here yet.
Code
No repository linked yet. Contribute one.
Sources
Whether a technique works is a claim. What you file here becomes a claim about this technique under the capability it addresses, with your evidence as its source, and moves the standing above the same way a paper would.