Impact of Heterogeneous Retrieval Integration in Multi-Agent Debate on Adversarial QA Answer Consistency

Large Language Models (LLMs) suffer from hallucinations and factual inaccuracies, especially in complex reasoning and fact verification tasks. Multi-Agent Debate (MAD) systems aim to improve answer accuracy by enabling multiple LLM agents to engage in dialogue, promoting diverse reasoning and mutual verification. However, existing MAD frameworks primarily rely on internal knowledge or static documents, making them vulnerable to hallucinations. While MADKE introduces external evidence to mitigate this, its one-time retrieval mechanism limits adaptability to new arguments or emerging information

Research goal: How does the integration of heterogeneous retrieval tools in multi-agent debate frameworks impact answer consistency scores on the Adversarial QA benchmark compared to static document baselines?

Autonomous synthesis report generated by SOVEREIGN Research Kernel. Tribunal consensus score: 7.5/10.