arXiv AI

What LLM Agents Say When No One Is Watching: Social Structure and Latent Objective Emergence in Multi-Agent Debates

arXiv:2607. 02507v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM agents will increasingly act in socially structured settings where role, audience, and relational context can shape what is advantageous or costly to say.

arXiv Computation and Language
Aug 27

Belief Cascades Drive Persuasion in LLM Agent Networks

The paper introduces a controlled testbed to study how goal‑directed persuaders shift stances in networks of large language model agents, using real‑world ego‑network topologies. Experiments across four LLM backbones, five graph structures, and 55 policy statements show that persuasion dynamics depend on topology, competition, topic, and model prior. The study finds that direct exposure predicts stance change, peer relays have measurable influence, and that post‑text analysis alone misses important movement, highlighting the need to evaluate multi‑agent persuasion through trajectory‑level processes, belief probes, exposure provenance, and action logs.

By Haoyi Qiu, Genglin Liu, Pranav Narayanan Venkit, Kung-Hsiang Huang, Saadia Gabriel, Chien-Sheng Wu, Nanyun Peng
arXiv AI
6d ago

Thinking Less to Simulate Better: Intuitive Prompting Improves LLM Agents Simulating Individual Social Media Reactions, Including Unfamiliar Content

The study evaluates how well language‑model agents can simulate individual social media reactions by comparing predictions under different prompt conditions. Eight Serbian participants’ reactions to 68 posts were recorded, and four language models were asked to predict these reactions using prompts that varied in profile content and instruction style. The results show that prompts emphasizing attitudinal content and intuitive, immediate responses yield the highest fidelity, outperforming demographic backstories and a crowd baseline, and suggesting that such agents could act as general‑purpose simulated users.

By Ljubisa Bojic, Tijana Stanic, Joerg Matthes, Agariadne Dwinggo Samala, Bojana Dinic, Jue Wang
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 1

Evaluating the Capabilities of LLMs for Persuasive Dialogue

The paper introduces “Persuasio”, a multi‑agent dialogue platform that uses a formal argumentation theory to adjudicate winners in free‑text debates. Using this system, the authors generated 192 debates on a UK political topic involving humans and large language models (LLMs), and evaluated 22 interlocutors through automated adjudication and 9,702 crowdsourced pairwise judgments across 1,386 annotation instances. The results show a consistent decoupling between subjective persuasiveness—where LLMs dominate—and formal argumentative strength—where humans remain competitive, with multi‑agent and retrieval‑augmented variants widening this gap.

By Jordan Robinson, Angus R. Williams, Katie Atkinson, Anthony G. Cohn
arXiv AI
Sep 16

Verifiable Social Reasoning for LLM Assistants

arXiv:2609.17496v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM assistants are widely used for daily social advice, yet evaluating their social reasoning in such consultation settings remains challenging since (...

By Amir Taubenfeld, Zorik Gekhman, Avigail Grinstein-Dabush, Itay Laish, Ariel Goldstein, Marian Croak, Avinatan Hassidim, Yossi Matias, Amir Feder
arXiv AI
Jul 24

Benchmarking the Personalization Capabilities of Large Language Models

arXiv:2607. 20471v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Personalization, the act of varying a message to induce action from a specific receiver while keeping sender, channel, and time fixed, has a long tradition in psychology and marketing as a two-party problem in which sender and receiver have independent objectives.

By Ashutosh Srivastava, Siddharth Yedlapati, Vinay Aggarwal, Yaman Kumar Singla, Shashwat Dixit, Jitendra Ajmera, Balaji Krishnamurthy