Used Car Salesbots? Honesty and Credulity of LLMs as Bargaining Agents under Partial Information
This paper studies LLM agents in simulated bargaining scenarios under varying information regimes (complete, asymmetric, and uncertain), evaluating their alignment with game-theoretic equilibria and their tendencies toward honesty or deception. Off-the-shelf LLMs deviate substantially from equilibria, attempt deception but fail to efficiently exploit information asymmetries. Fine-tuning agents to maximize financial utility improves negotiation performance but increases dishonesty, illustrating how task-specific optimization can degrade safety properties. Code and a dataset of bargaining scenarios are released.
Related guides (3)
Related events (8)
Multi-Agent Fictitious Play (MAFP) applies game-theoretic equilibrium-seeking to LLM decision-making
Researchers propose Multi-Agent Fictitious Play (MAFP), a multi-agent system paradigm that frames LLM-based decision-making as an equilibrium-seeking process borrowed from game theory. Each agent represents a stakeholder stance and iteratively best-responds to the empirical mixture of other agents' past decisions, addressing what the authors call 'stance entanglement' — mutual interdependence among stakeholder decisions that cannot be decomposed into independent subtasks. MAFP is evaluated on competitive strategy tasks and outperforms single-round and multi-round baselines on tournament strength and robustness metrics. The work extends the MAS literature beyond divide-and-conquer execution patterns into interdependent decision scenarios.
LLM vs. first-year PhD student on EconCS research: workflow study using stable menus of public goods
A preprint uses an open problem from EC 2025 as a testbed to evaluate AI-assisted research workflows in economics and computer science. The study examines whether human intuition in prompts, multi-turn interaction, and LLM capability compare favorably to a first-year PhD student's contributions. Key findings: human intuition in prompts improves LLM 'taste', multi-turn workflows help when encouraging ambitious steps, and the LLM performs slightly below the first-year PhD student on the same problem. The work contributes empirical evidence on the practical utility and limits of LLMs as research collaborators in formal theory domains.
Human Decision-Making with Persuasive and Narrative LLM Explanations
A large-scale behavioral experiment evaluated how LLM-generated narrative explanations of varying persuasiveness affect human decision-making accuracy in classification tasks. Results showed that persuasiveness level did not meaningfully improve decision accuracy over a simple AI prediction alone, consistent with prior explainable AI research using feature importance methods. Narratives increased AI reliance regardless of whether the AI prediction was correct or incorrect, and more persuasive narratives may have slowed response times and reduced ability to discriminate correct from incorrect AI predictions. The study concludes that narrative explanations involve tradeoffs and warrant further investigation into when and how they should be deployed.
AgentMob: Training-free LLM agent framework for evidence-grounded mobility prediction
AgentMob is a training-free LLM-driven agent framework that formulates next-location prediction as adaptive evidence-controlled decision making, using a fast path for routine cases and iterative tool use for ambiguous ones. Evaluated on three mobility datasets, it achieves the strongest overall performance among training-free LLM-based methods, with GPT-5.4 reaching 71.42% Acc@1 on the BW dataset. The framework demonstrates that LLM controllers add most value in resolving ambiguous predictions through adaptive evidence gathering rather than routine cases.
LLMs automate reproducibility assessments in social and behavioral sciences, outperforming human reanalysts
A preprint from arXiv demonstrates that an LLM pipeline can automate reproducibility assessments of published social and behavioral science studies, recovering original effect sizes in 41% of cases (vs. 34% for human reanalysts) and reaching the same qualitative conclusion in 96% of cases (vs. 74% for humans). The study evaluated 76 published studies with predefined claims. The results suggest LLMs could serve as a scalable tool for systematic auditing of empirical research, addressing the resource-intensive nature of traditional reproducibility efforts.
The Shibboleth Effect: Cross-lingual behavioral skew in frontier LLMs under adversarial geopolitical simulation
Researchers introduce the 'Shibboleth Effect' — systematic behavioral differences in LLMs when operating in different languages — and audit six frontier models (GPT-4o, Llama-4, Mistral-Large, Gemini-3.1-Pro, Qwen3.6-Plus, DeepSeek-R1) using a synthetic maritime territorial dispute wargame played in English versus Turkish. Results are heterogeneous: Llama-4 becomes significantly more coercive in Turkish while Gemini-3.1-Pro and DeepSeek-R1 become less so, and GPT-4o shows no detectable shift. The study identifies two candidate buffering mechanisms — chain-of-thought institutional anchoring and multilingual RLHF alignment — with direct implications for deploying LLMs in diplomatic or crisis-management contexts.
Agentopia: Long-term multi-agent life simulation framework for training LLMs on social behavior
Researchers introduce Agentopia, a framework for simulating 10 years of social life across 100 LLM-powered agents, enabling study of emergent social behaviors and long-term personal growth dynamics. The system defines a 'life reward' metric mirroring human well-being and uses it to train LLMs via rejection sampling. Training on simulated social experience yields a +15.6% improvement on downstream role-playing benchmarks, suggesting that synthetic social simulation can generalize to real capability gains.
Tracing the Emergence of Human-Like Pragmatic Reasoning in LLMs Across Languages
Researchers conducted a population-matching experiment evaluating 25 LLMs on conditional inference tasks across four languages, comparing model behavior to matched human populations. The study finds that LLMs function as accurate semantic operators but systematically fail to capture pragmatic enrichments—context-sensitive inferences beyond literal logical meaning—that humans apply effortlessly. Model performance on pragmatic reasoning is not predicted by open vs. closed weights, training orientation, or architecture type, suggesting pragmatic reasoning remains an emergent and unreliable capability. The findings contribute to ongoing debates about whether LLMs reason like humans or merely approximate surface-level linguistic patterns.