arXiv:2607. 11632v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Human choice behavior, including route choice, exhibits systematic behavioral biases that deviate from the assumptions of full rationality.
By Jiangtao Han, Shoufeng Ma, Shuxian Xu, Geng Li, Shuai Ling, Ning Jia, Zhengbing He
Human choice behavior, including route choice, exhibits systematic behavioral biases that deviate from the assumptions of full rationality. Cumulative prospect theory (CPT) has been widely recognized as an effective framework for characterizing such behavioral patterns.
arXiv:2607. 16197v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: As artificial intelligence systems are deployed in open-ended, high-stakes settings, a critical dimension remains unmeasured: how perceived risk is translated into action.
By Bowen Sun, Rui Min, Yuxi Wang, Brian Odegaard, Qi Wang, Jing Du
Recent advancements in Large Language Models (LLMs) have enabled sophisticated reasoning and content generation, yet their inherent stochasticity poses significant challenges for ensuring predictive credibility. While traditional uncertainty taxonomy paradigms, such as the dichotomy of aleatoric and epistemic uncertainties, provide conceptual foundations, they often fail to capture the multi-component and multi-stage nature of LLM generation and struggle to evaluate the effectiveness of various Uncertainty Quantification (UQ) methods.
arXiv:2602. 09802v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: As Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in applications such as travel assistance and purchasing support, they are often required to make subjective choices on behalf of users in settings where no objectively correct answer exists.
By Manon Reusens, Sofie Goethals, Toon Calders, David Martens
arXiv:2603. 24967v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Understanding why a large language model (LLM) is uncertain about the response is important for their reliable deployment.
By Aditya Taparia, Ransalu Senanayake, Kowshik Thopalli, Vivek Narayanaswamy
arXiv:2607. 19367v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Calibration is the primary criterion for evaluating LLM confidence, but it is insufficient: it admits trivially incoherent estimators, depends on the evaluation distribution, and does not test the extent to which the estimation can be interpreted as a consistent, underlying probability function.
By Krish Matta, Atharv Naphade, Andy Zou
arXiv:2607. 10251v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: As large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in decision support, it is important to understand whether their choices under uncertainty exhibit stable and interpretable behavioural regularities.
By Xuankun Rong, Wenke Huang, Bo Du, Dacheng Tao, Mang Ye
arXiv:2606. 22974v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Recent work on preference elicitation in large language models (LLMs) has demonstrated that, when given a series of choices between two outcomes, LLMs reveal a coherent, model-specific utility structure.
By Yujun Zhou, Christopher M. Ackerman
arXiv:2507. 06722v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Understanding how large language models (LLMs) internally represent and process their predictions is central to detecting uncertainty and preventing hallucinations.
By Sunwoo Kim, Haneul Yoo, Alice Oh
arXiv:2605. 19674v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Strategic classification(SC) studies the interaction between decision models and agents who strategically manipulate their features for favorable outcomes.
By Xinpeng Lv, Yunxin Mao, Renzhe Xu, Chunyuan Zheng, Yikai Chen, Haoxuan Li, Yang Shi, Jinxuan Yang, Zhouchen Lin, Yuanlong Chen, Yuanxing Zhang, Shaowu Yang, Wenjing Yang, Haotian Wang
arXiv:2606. 11016v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We ask whether large language models (LLMs) merely imitate rationales when choosing between two options, or whether their choices reflect a systematic underlying decision structure.
By Gabriel Freedman, Francesca Toni