orchestra

Multi-LLM debate coordinates multiple models exchanging proposals, verdicts, and justifications to synthesize robust decisions. Each model sees the complete chain of prior rounds to improve decision quality and prevent information loss.

To start a multi-model debate, ask the system to compare two proposals. The workflow orchestrates a transparent exchange of verdicts and justifications across models, ultimately surfacing a final synthesized plan with explicit attribution.

Yes, you can track costs and surface blind spots during multi-model reasoning tasks. The debate workflow includes built-in guardrails and transparency features that monitor resource usage and highlight potential gaps to guide complex decisions.

Yes, multi-LLM debate preserves full context across all models. Each participating model sees the complete chain of proposals, verdicts, and justifications from prior rounds, ensuring no information is lost between debate cycles.

The best way to synthesize diverse LLM viewpoints for breeding decisions is using attributed synthesis. This method produces an explicit summary of diverse model viewpoints, applying guardrails to surface blind spots and guide complex flock management choices.

You should avoid round-robin multi-model debates for simple, single-answer tasks that do not require diverse viewpoints or complex reasoning. The debate workflow is designed for complex tasks needing proposals, verdicts, and justifications across multiple models.