A Novel Hierarchical Multi-Agent System for Payments Using LLMs

Joon Kiat Chua, Donghao Huang, Zhaoxia Wang · Feb 27, 2026 · Citations: 0

Open arXiv Find Implementation RSS feed Shortlist (0)

Data freshness

Extraction: Fresh

Check recency before relying on this page for active eval decisions. Use stale pages as context and verify against current hub results.

Metadata refreshed

Feb 27, 2026, 2:58 PM

Recent

Extraction refreshed

Mar 8, 2026, 6:56 AM

Fresh

Extraction source

Runtime deterministic fallback

Confidence 0.15

Abstract

Large language model (LLM) agents, such as OpenAI's Operator and Claude's Computer Use, can automate workflows but unable to handle payment tasks. Existing agentic solutions have gained significant attention; however, even the latest approaches face challenges in implementing end-to-end agentic payment workflows. To address this gap, this research proposes the Hierarchical Multi-Agent System for Payments (HMASP), which provides an end-to-end agentic method for completing payment workflows. The proposed HMASP leverages either open-weight or proprietary LLMs and employs a modular architecture consisting of the Conversational Payment Agent (CPA - first agent level), Supervisor agents (second agent level), Routing agents (third agent level), and the Process summary agent (fourth agent level). The CPA serves as the central entry point, handling all external requests and coordinating subsequent tasks across hierarchical levels. HMASP incorporates architectural patterns that enable modular task execution across agents and levels for payment operations, including shared state variables, decoupled message states, and structured handoff protocols that facilitate coordination across agents and workflows. Experimental results demonstrate the feasibility of the proposed HMASP. To our knowledge, HMASP is the first LLM-based multi-agent system to implement end-to-end agentic payment workflows. This work lays a foundation for extending agentic capabilities into the payment domain.

Low-signal caution for protocol decisions

Use this page for context, then validate protocol choices against stronger HFEPX references before implementation decisions.

Extraction flags indicate low-signal or possible false-positive protocol mapping.
Extraction confidence is 0.15 (below strong-reference threshold).
No benchmark/dataset or metric anchors were extracted.

Human Eval Hub LLM-as-Judge Hub Pairwise Preference Hub

HFEPX Relevance Assessment

This paper is adjacent to HFEPX scope and is best used for background context, not as a primary protocol reference.

Best use

Background context only

Use if you need

A secondary eval reference to pair with stronger protocol papers.

Main weakness

Extraction flags indicate low-signal or possible false-positive protocol mapping.

Trust level

Low

Eval-Fit Score

0/100 • Low

Treat as adjacent context, not a core eval-method reference.

Human Feedback Signal

Not explicit in abstract metadata

Evaluation Signal

Detected

HFEPX Fit

Adjacent candidate

Extraction confidence: Low

If you are doing eval pipeline work, start here:

Human Eval Hub LLM-as-Judge Hub Pairwise Preference Hub Tool-Use Eval Hub

Field Provenance & Confidence

Each key protocol field shows extraction state, confidence band, and data source so you can decide whether to trust it directly or validate from full text.

Human Feedback Types

missing

None explicit

Confidence: Low Source: Runtime deterministic fallback missing

No explicit feedback protocol extracted.