@inproceedings{e-sobhani-etal-2026-multi,
    title = "Do Multi-Agents Solve Better Than Single? Evaluating Agentic Frameworks for Diagram-Grounded Geometry Problem Solving and Reasoning",
    author = "E Sobhani, Mahbub  and
      Sayeedi, Md. Faiyaz Abdullah  and
      Alam, Mohammad Nehad  and
      Progga, Proma Hossain  and
      Shatabda, Swakkhar",
    editor = "Baez Santamaria, Selene  and
      Somayajula, Sai Ashish  and
      Yamaguchi, Atsuki",
    booktitle = "Proceedings of the 19th Conference of the {E}uropean Chapter of the {A}ssociation for {C}omputational {L}inguistics (Volume 4: Student Research Workshop)",
    month = mar,
    year = "2026",
    address = "Rabat, Morocco",
    publisher = "Association for Computational Linguistics",
    url = "https://preview.aclanthology.org/ingest-eacl/2026.eacl-srw.4/",
    pages = "27--47",
    ISBN = "979-8-89176-383-8",
    abstract = "Diagram-grounded geometry problem solving is a critical benchmark for multimodal large language models (MLLMs), yet the benefits of multi-agent design over single-agent remain unclear. We systematically compare single-agent and multi-agent pipelines on four visual math benchmarks: Geometry3K, MathVerse, OlympiadBench, and We-Math. For open-source models, multi-agent consistently improves performance. For example, Qwen-2.5-VL (7B) gains +6.8 points and Qwen-2.5-VL (32B) gains +3.3 on Geometry3K, and both Qwen-2.5-VL variants see further gains on OlympiadBench and We-Math. In contrast, the closed-source Gemini-2.0-Flash generally performs better in single-agent mode on classic benchmarks, while multi-agent yields only modest improvements on the newer We-Math dataset. These findings show that multi-agent pipelines provide clear benefits for open-source models and can assist strong proprietary systems on newer, less familiar benchmarks, but agentic decomposition is not universally optimal. All code, data, and reasoning files are available at https://github.com/faiyazabdullah/Interpreter-Solver"
}