<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Talk Isn't Always Cheap: Understanding Failure Modes in Multi-Agent Debate · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2509.05396/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2509.05396/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Talk Isn't Always Cheap: Understanding Failure Modes in Multi-Agent Debate — mentioned by ian_j_butler</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48347527</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2509.05396:48347527</guid><pubDate>Sun, 31 May 2026 17:21:25 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Hah, since it&amp;#x27;s open in another tab: Talk Isn’t Always Cheap: Understanding Failure Modes in Multi-Agent Debate @ https://arxiv.org/html/2509.05396v2 To actually engage more with the substance of TFA.. very refreshing to see someone bringing numbers. To me this shows we (still) need something somewhere between the numbers and the anecdata. It&amp;#x27;s annoying to hear claims of &amp;quot;1000x productivity&amp;quot; or claims of negative/neutral productivity without any extra context whatsoever. So you brought data? Great! But still no context. Boring CRUD? Complex UI? A rewrite/port of legacy? What industry…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2509.05396/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.CL</category></item></channel></rss>
