CriticalBrew at CQs-Gen 2025: Collaborative Multi-Agent Generation and Evaluation of Critical Questions for Arguments

This paper presents the CriticalBrew submission to the CQs-Gen 2025 shared task, which focuses on generating critical questions (CQs) for a given argument.Our approach employs a multi-agent framework containing two sequential components: 1) Generation: machine society simulation for generating CQs and 2) Evaluation: LLM-based evaluation for selecting the top three questions.The first models collaboration as a sequence of thinking patterns (e.g., debate reflect).The second assesses the generated questions using zero-shot prompting, evaluating them against several criteria (e.g., depth).Experiments with different open-weight LLMs (small vs. large) consistently outperformed the baseline, a single LLM with zero-shot prompting.Two configurations, agent count and thinking patterns, significantly impacted the performance in the shared task's CQ-usefulness evaluation, whereas different LLM-based evaluation strategies (e.g., scoring) had no impact.Our code is available on GitHub 1 .

Authors

Publication Details

Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2025.argmining-1.30
Primary Topic
Software Engineering Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

CriticalBrew at CQs-Gen 2025: Collaborative Multi-Agent Generation and Evaluation of Critical Questions for Arguments

Dominik Opitz, Roxanne El Baff, Diaoulé Diallo
Software Engineering Research
article

CriticalBrew at CQs-Gen 2025: Collaborative Multi-Agent Generation and Evaluation of Critical Questions for Arguments

Dominik Opitz, Roxanne El Baff, Diaoulé Diallo
article en

Abstract

This paper presents the CriticalBrew submission to the CQs-Gen 2025 shared task, which focuses on generating critical questions (CQs) for a given argument.Our approach employs a multi-agent framework containing two sequential components: 1) Generation: machine society simulation for generating CQs and 2) Evaluation: LLM-based evaluation for selecting the top three questions.The first models collaboration as a sequence of thinking patterns (e.g., debate reflect).The second assesses the generated questions using zero-shot prompting, evaluating them against several criteria (e.g., depth).Experiments with different open-weight LLMs (small vs. large) consistently outperformed the baseline, a single LLM with zero-shot prompting.Two configurations, agent count and thinking patterns, significantly impacted the performance in the shared task's CQ-usefulness evaluation, whereas different LLM-based evaluation strategies (e.g., scoring) had no impact.Our code is available on GitHub 1 .

Openalex Percentile: Top 71%
Software Engineering Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

CriticalBrew at CQs-Gen 2025: Collaborative Multi-Agent Generation and Evaluation of Critical Questions for Arguments — Dominik Opitz, Roxanne El Baff, et al. · (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS