Paper
From Debate to Deliberation: Structured Collective Reasoning with Typed Epistemic Acts
Authors
Sunil Prakash
Abstract
Multi-agent LLM systems increasingly tackle complex reasoning, yet their interaction patterns remain limited to voting, unstructured debate, or pipeline orchestration. None model deliberation: a phased process where differentiated participants exchange typed reasoning moves, preserve disagreements, and converge on accountable outcomes. We introduce Deliberative Collective Intelligence (DCI), specifying four reasoning archetypes, 14 typed epistemic acts, a shared workspace, and DCI-CF, a convergent flow algorithm that guarantees termination with a structured decision packet containing the selected option, residual objections, minority report, and reopen conditions. We evaluate on 45 tasks across seven domains using Gemini 2.5 Flash. On non-routine tasks (n=40), DCI significantly improves over unstructured debate (+0.95, 95% CI [+0.41, +1.54]). DCI excels on hidden-profile tasks requiring perspective integration (9.56, highest of any system on any domain) while failing on routine decisions (5.39), confirming task-dependence. DCI produces 100% structured decision packets and 98% minority reports, artifacts absent from all baselines. However, DCI consumes ~62x single-agent tokens, and single-agent generation outperforms DCI on overall quality. DCI's contribution is not that more agents are better, but that consequential decisions benefit from deliberative structure when process accountability justifies the cost.
Metadata
Related papers
Gen-Searcher: Reinforcing Agentic Search for Image Generation
Kaituo Feng, Manyuan Zhang, Shuang Chen, Yunlong Lin, Kaixuan Fan, Yilei Jian... • 2026-03-30
On-the-fly Repulsion in the Contextual Space for Rich Diversity in Diffusion Transformers
Omer Dahary, Benaya Koren, Daniel Garibi, Daniel Cohen-Or • 2026-03-30
Graphilosophy: Graph-Based Digital Humanities Computing with The Four Books
Minh-Thu Do, Quynh-Chau Le-Tran, Duc-Duy Nguyen-Mai, Thien-Trang Nguyen, Khan... • 2026-03-30
ParaSpeechCLAP: A Dual-Encoder Speech-Text Model for Rich Stylistic Language-Audio Pretraining
Anuj Diwan, Eunsol Choi, David Harwath • 2026-03-30
RAD-AI: Rethinking Architecture Documentation for AI-Augmented Ecosystems
Oliver Aleksander Larsen, Mahyar T. Moghaddam • 2026-03-30
Raw Data (Debug)
{
"raw_xml": "<entry>\n <id>http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.11781v1</id>\n <title>From Debate to Deliberation: Structured Collective Reasoning with Typed Epistemic Acts</title>\n <updated>2026-03-12T10:39:41Z</updated>\n <link href='https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.11781v1' rel='alternate' type='text/html'/>\n <link href='https://arxiv.org/pdf/2603.11781v1' rel='related' title='pdf' type='application/pdf'/>\n <summary>Multi-agent LLM systems increasingly tackle complex reasoning, yet their interaction patterns remain limited to voting, unstructured debate, or pipeline orchestration. None model deliberation: a phased process where differentiated participants exchange typed reasoning moves, preserve disagreements, and converge on accountable outcomes. We introduce Deliberative Collective Intelligence (DCI), specifying four reasoning archetypes, 14 typed epistemic acts, a shared workspace, and DCI-CF, a convergent flow algorithm that guarantees termination with a structured decision packet containing the selected option, residual objections, minority report, and reopen conditions. We evaluate on 45 tasks across seven domains using Gemini 2.5 Flash. On non-routine tasks (n=40), DCI significantly improves over unstructured debate (+0.95, 95% CI [+0.41, +1.54]). DCI excels on hidden-profile tasks requiring perspective integration (9.56, highest of any system on any domain) while failing on routine decisions (5.39), confirming task-dependence. DCI produces 100% structured decision packets and 98% minority reports, artifacts absent from all baselines. However, DCI consumes ~62x single-agent tokens, and single-agent generation outperforms DCI on overall quality. DCI's contribution is not that more agents are better, but that consequential decisions benefit from deliberative structure when process accountability justifies the cost.</summary>\n <category scheme='http://arxiv.org/schemas/atom' term='cs.AI'/>\n <category scheme='http://arxiv.org/schemas/atom' term='cs.CL'/>\n <category scheme='http://arxiv.org/schemas/atom' term='cs.MA'/>\n <published>2026-03-12T10:39:41Z</published>\n <arxiv:comment>26 pages, 6 tables, 2 figures, 2 listings</arxiv:comment>\n <arxiv:primary_category term='cs.AI'/>\n <author>\n <name>Sunil Prakash</name>\n </author>\n </entry>"
}