AIDB Daily Papers
注意安定性の境界を超えて:エージェントによる自己合成推論プロトコル
※ 日本語タイトル・ポイントはAIによる自動生成です。正確な内容は原論文をご確認ください。
ポイント
- LLMエージェントが非線形対話で目標指向性を維持する際のアーキテクチャ上のボトルネック「Attention Latch」を特定・形式化した。
- この問題に対処するため、高レベル計画と逐次実行を分離するメタ認知フレームワーク「SSRP」を提案し、その有効性を検証した。
- SSRPは、従来のベースラインと比較して715倍のレジリエンス向上を達成し、複数の大規模言語モデルで統計的に有意な改善を示した。
Abstract
As LLM agents transition to autonomous digital coworkers, maintaining deterministic goal-directedness in non-linear multi-turn conversations emerged as an architectural bottleneck. We identify and formalize a systemic failure mode termed the Attention Latch in decoder-only autoregressive Transformers. This phenomenon, a behavioral manifestation of Information Over-squashing, occurs when the cumulative probabilistic weight of historical context overrides mid-task updates, causing agents to remain anchored to obsolete constraints despite explicit contradictory instructions. We propose Self-Synthesizing Reasoning Protocols (SSRP), a metacognitive framework that implements a discrete separation between high-level architectural planning (Architect) and turn-by-turn procedural execution (Executive). We evaluate SSRP across 9K trajectories using the MultiWOZ 2.2 dataset and the Aggregate Pivot Accuracy (APA), a novel metric we validate by mapping its scores to the U-shaped 'Lost in the Middle' curve. We present 3 experimental tiers: a shallow recency-based retrieval pilot, a high-entropy SOP, and a semantic hijacked 3-hop Multi-Fact Synthesis task. Our results empirically locate the Attention Stability Boundary, where stateless Vanilla ReAct baselines for GPT 5.4 collapse to 0.1% success while SSRP achieves a 715X Resilience Lift. We demonstrate statistically significant gains across Gemini 3.1 Pro, Claude Sonnet 4.6 and DeepSeek V3.2. Audits confirm SSRP necessity by proving attentional lapse via a recursive reflexion baseline (100% success); decoupling the latch from positional bias through equidistant stress testing (90% accuracy); and formalizing SSRP via the Information Bottleneck principle and granularity ablations. Procedural Integrity audit (98.8% adherence) reveals a Grounding Paradox where high-stability models fail by refusing to hallucinate under retrieval-reasoning contamination.
Paper AI Chat
この論文のPDF全文を対象にAIに質問できます。
質問の例: