Agent-Based Detection and Resolution of Incompleteness and Ambiguity in Interactions with Large Language Models
July 04, 2025 Β· Declared Dead Β· π arXiv.org
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Riya Naik, Ashwin Srinivasan, Swati Agarwal, Estrid He
arXiv ID
2507.03726
Category
cs.AI: Artificial Intelligence
Cross-listed
cs.CL,
cs.IR
Citations
0
Venue
arXiv.org
Last Checked
4 months ago
Abstract
Many of us now treat LLMs as modern-day oracles asking it almost any kind of question. However, consulting an LLM does not have to be a single turn activity. But long multi-turn interactions can get tedious if it is simply to clarify contextual information that can be arrived at through reasoning. In this paper, we examine the use of agent-based architecture to bolster LLM-based Question-Answering systems with additional reasoning capabilities. We examine the automatic resolution of potential incompleteness or ambiguities in questions by transducers implemented using LLM-based agents. We focus on several benchmark datasets that are known to contain questions with these deficiencies to varying degrees. We equip different LLMs (GPT-3.5-Turbo and Llama-4-Scout) with agents that act as specialists in detecting and resolving deficiencies of incompleteness and ambiguity. The agents are implemented as zero-shot ReAct agents. Rather than producing an answer in a single step, the model now decides between 3 actions a) classify b) resolve c) answer. Action a) decides if the question is incomplete, ambiguous, or normal. Action b) determines if any deficiencies identified can be resolved. Action c) answers the resolved form of the question. We compare the use of LLMs with and without the use of agents with these components. Our results show benefits of agents with transducer 1) A shortening of the length of interactions with human 2) An improvement in the answer quality and 3) Explainable resolution of deficiencies in the question. On the negative side we find while it may result in additional LLM invocations and in some cases, increased latency. But on tested datasets, the benefits outweigh the costs except when questions already have sufficient context. Suggesting the agent-based approach could be a useful mechanism to harness the power of LLMs to develop more robust QA systems.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Artificial Intelligence
π
π
The Cartographer
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Explanation in Artificial Intelligence: Insights from the Social Sciences
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Federated Machine Learning: Concept and Applications
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Counterfactual Explanations without Opening the Black Box: Automated Decisions and the GDPR
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
DeepAR: Probabilistic Forecasting with Autoregressive Recurrent Networks
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Rainbow: Combining Improvements in Deep Reinforcement Learning
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted