Multi-Modal LLM Agent Framework

• The framework decomposes complex queries into modular, explainable workflows that coordinate specialized tool invocations.
• It employs LLM-based planning using a directed acyclic graph to manage dependencies and enable dynamic error recovery.
• Empirical evaluations demonstrate enhanced accuracy, reduced latency, and improved explanation quality over legacy systems.

A Multi-Modal LLM Agent Framework is an architectural, algorithmic, and systems paradigm in which LLMs—potentially enhanced with vision, audio, code, or other modality embeddings—coordinate tool invocations and break down complex, multi-modal queries into structured workflows. These frameworks target data lakes or systems with heterogeneous modalities (e.g., structured tables, unstructured text, images, and videos) and return not only an answer grounded in the underlying data but also an explicit, stepwise, human-interpretable explanation of the reasoning pipeline. The XMODE system exemplifies the state of the art in this class of frameworks, advancing explainability, planning efficiency, accuracy, and multi-modal orchestration (Nooralahzadeh et al., 2024).

1. Formal Definition and Problem Statement

The central problem is: Given a complex natural-language query $Q$ and a multi-modal data lake $$D = \{D_{\text{tabular}}, D_{\text{text}}, D_{\text{image}}, ...\}$$, produce (i) an answer $A$ (potentially a scalar, table, object, or visualization), and (ii) a human-readable explanation $E$ that traces the computation of $A$ through a series of verifiable, data-grounded reasoning steps.

Formally, for any $Q \in \mathrm{NL}$ and $D = \langle S, I, ...\rangle$, the system should compute

$$A = f(D, Q) \quad \text{and} \quad E = \text{explain}(f, Q, D)$$

where $f$ is a multi-stage workflow combining structured queries (e.g., text-to-SQL) and unstructured-data models (e.g., visual question answering), with explicit dependency management and traceable intermediate states (Nooralahzadeh et al., 2024).

2. System Architecture and Workflow

The canonical multi-modal LLM agent framework is modular, hierarchical, and explicitly models tool invocation, planning, error recovery, and explanation synthesis. The XMODE system architecture comprises five core components:

1. Planner (LLM-based): Reads the input query $Q$ and tool specifications, then decomposes $Q$ into a directed acyclic graph (DAG) $G = (V, E)$ of subtasks $t_1\ldots t_n$. Each node $t_i$ is annotated with the tool to invoke, input arguments, and dependency set.
2. Executor & Self-Debugging: Maintains a shared state object $S$. Ready tasks (with all dependencies satisfied) are executed, tool outputs are stored in $S$, and errors are intercepted for local mini-replanning (not global), enabling efficient step-level recovery.
3. Decision Maker (LLM-based): Inspects the state $S$ post-execution. If $A$ can be assembled, triggers explanation generation; if not recoverable, requests a global replan. Otherwise, reports failure.
4. Expert Models & Tools: Modular APIs expose specialist capabilities such as:
   • text2SQL: NL-to-SQL translation and database connectivity
   • image_VQA: Visual question answering (e.g., BLIP-2, M3AE)
   • data_prep: Intermediate result cleaning/aggregation
   • visualization: Plotting (matplotlib, seaborn)
   • All tools are functionally independent and can be dynamically invoked
5. Data Lake: Consists of a relational database for structured data and a file store for raw modalities (images, documents) (Nooralahzadeh et al., 2024).

The overall execution loop is as follows (see pseudocode in (Nooralahzadeh et al., 2024)): plan (decompose with <PLAN>), execute (debug and record with <DEBUG>), and decide (verify with <DECIDE>), with a bounded number of iterations for replanning.

3. Prompt Engineering and Agentic Reasoning

XMODE leverages LLMs as active agents using three core prompt "contexts" with explicit control tokens:

• <PLAN>...</PLAN>: High-level decomposition of $Q$ into a DAG of subtasks. Output is a formal list of tasks with IDs, tools, arguments, and dependencies as JSON.
• <DEBUG>...</DEBUG>: For each execution step, the LLM explains reasoning in human-readable form, supporting traceability and later explanation synthesis.
• <DECIDE>...</DECIDE>: At the end (or after partial failure), assesses whether the state is consistent, and whether to assemble the final answer, replan, or signal inability to answer.

Templates explicitly inject available tools, schemas, and dependencies into LLM prompts, enforcing reproducible and interpretable decision chains (Nooralahzadeh et al., 2024).

4. Model Integration and Tool Invocations

Specialized modules interface with the LLM agentic core:

• text2SQL Module: Accepts an NL query and schema; utilizes LLM function calls to generate SQL, which is executed against the appropriate RDBMS, returning tabular results as lists of dictionary rows.
• image_VQA Module: For image path and question pairs, performs RESTful calls to VQA models (e.g., BLIP-2), returning concise text answers, which are aggregated by painting or sample.
• Data Aggregation: After all subtask outputs are present in state $S$, downstream aggregation (e.g., grouping, boolean flagging, table joins, plotting) is performed.
• Explanation Generation: The final explanation $E$ concatenates the plan summary, per-step <DEBUG> logs, and all mathematical aggregation steps, resulting in rich, stepwise "proofs" of each answer (Nooralahzadeh et al., 2024).

The Explanation Quality Metric ($Q_{\text{expl}}$) quantifies the proportion of steps with documented reasoning: $$Q_{\text{expl}} = \frac{N_{\text{doc}}}{N_{\text{steps}}}$$ where $N_{\text{steps}}$ is the number of tasks plus planning and decision, and $N_{\text{doc}}$ counts non-empty explanations.

5. Empirical Evaluation and Performance Metrics

XMODE has been rigorously evaluated on two multi-modal benchmarks:

• Artwork Dataset: NL queries over 1 structured table and 100 images, with oracle gold answers.
• EHRXQA Dataset: 100 sampled NL queries over 18 tables and 432 chest X-ray images.

Baseline systems included CAESURA and NeuralSQL.

Empirical results ((Nooralahzadeh et al., 2024), direct numerical claims):

Metric	XMODE (Artwork)	CAESURA	XMODE (EHRXQA)	NeuralSQL (EHRXQA)
Accuracy	63.33%	33.33%	51.00%	33.00% (few-shot)
Latency (s)	3.04	5.82	–	–
API Cost (\$)	2.10	2.98	–	–
Explanation Quality	0.92	0.00	–	–
Planning Efficiency	6/30 (parallel)	–	–	–
Plan Coverage	–	–	98%	–

Notably, XMODE outperforms baselines in accuracy, latency, cost, and explanation quality. "Dynamic re-planning" is available in XMODE but not in NeuralSQL.

6. Technical Principles and Innovations

Key principles defining modern multi-modal LLM agent frameworks include:

• Agentic Decomposition: LLMs function as autonomous planners, stratifying the monolithic NL query into modular, type-constrained tool calls, managing explicit data dependencies.
• Parallelizable Execution: DAG-driven schedules support parallel execution of independent subtasks, improving efficiency (measured by Eff_plan).
• Fine-Grained Self-Debugging: On each tool failure, only the failing node is locally replanned, sharply reducing global recomputation.
• Stepwise Explainability: By binding each tool invocation to explicit, LLM-generated human reasoning (DEBUG logs), the provenance and interpretability of the final answer are maximized, and explanation quality can be formally measured.

Empirical findings support the claim that LLM-based frameworks leveraging these principles are more robust and efficient for multi-modal data exploration than legacy systems (Nooralahzadeh et al., 2024).

7. Limitations and Extensibility

While XMODE and similar frameworks provide substantial gains in explainability, efficiency, and scalability, current limitations include:

• Dependence on LLM prompt engineering for robust subtask decomposition and failure recovery, exposing sensitivity to model updates or prompt drift.
• Toolset modularity is necessary; integrating new modalities requires isolated tool APIs and schemas but does not require retraining LLM core parameters.
• Strictly bounded replanning loops; infinite-loop or catastrophic failures are avoided but at the cost of potentially unresolved queries.

The architecture is explicitly extensible: new expert models or tools can be added by registering APIs and updating planner prompt templates. Explanation synthesis and aggregation logic generalize to new domains, given proper intermediate result schemas.

---

In sum, the multi-modal LLM agent framework—epitomized by XMODE—provides a rigorous, explainable, and modular approach for orchestrating heterogeneous data exploration tasks in complex enterprise, scientific, and medical settings, with theoretical and empirical guarantees of stepwise reasoning, dynamic error recovery, parallel execution, and auditability (Nooralahzadeh et al., 2024).