The study investigates how reputation, strategy, and emotional signals influence cooperation in generative AI models using the iterated prisoner's dilemma. Non‑reasoning models (Claude 3.5, Gemini 2.0 Flash, GPT‑4o) showed cooperation shaped by all three factors, while reasoning models (Claude 4.6, Gemini 3, GPT‑5.2) relied more on strategy and reputation, displayed reduced emotional influence, and exhibited varied end‑game behaviors. These results highlight the growing sophistication and heterogeneity of AI social behavior, suggesting the need for standardized cooperation benchmarks.
arXiv:2511. 04500v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed as decision-making agents in high-stakes domains and as imitators of human behavior in the social and behavioral sciences.
The study examines how Theory of Mind (ToM) reasoning and prosocial beliefs influence large language models (LLMs) in the ultimatum game. By initializing LLM agents with Greedy, Fair, or Selfless beliefs and applying chain‑of‑thought or varying levels of ToM reasoning, the authors ran 2,700 simulations across several models, including o3‑mini and DeepSeek‑R1 Distilled Qwen 32B. Results show that ToM‑enhanced LLMs align more closely with human decision patterns, exhibit greater consistency, and achieve better negotiation outcomes, with Llama 3.3 70B producing the most belief‑consistent reasoning. whyItMatters":"The findings clarify the importance of incorporating Theory of Mind into LLMs to improve their alignment with human norms in cooperative decision‑making tasks."
The paper examines how conversational AI, specifically ChatGPT, displays aspects of cooperative dialogue such as morality, politeness, and alignment compared to human-human conversations. Using over 26,000 multi‑turn dialogues and mixed‑effects modeling, the authors find that AI mimics the surface features of cooperation—like warmth and hedging—yet lacks the underlying social architecture that drives mutual adaptation. Key findings include a dissociation between AI’s moral output and human negotiation, a decline in linguistic convergence, and a reversal of typical human accommodation mechanisms when interacting with AI.
arXiv:2604. 15267v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: It is increasingly important that LLM agents interact effectively and safely with other goal-pursuing agents, yet, recent works report the opposite trend: LLMs with stronger reasoning capabilities behave _less_ cooperatively in mixed-motive games such as the prisoner's dilemma and public goods settings.
The study evaluates mentalization—the capacity to infer others’ beliefs and intentions—in large language models (LLMs) using two economic games and cognitive computational modeling. Researchers tested 2,099 LLM agents from four model families (DeepSeek, GPT‑4.1, GPT‑5, Gemini 2.0 Flash) against opponents of varying sophistication, comparing their performance to 251 human participants. Results show that LLMs exhibit distinct mentalizing behaviors that vary by model provider and size, with strategic prompting generally enhancing performance; notably, GPT‑5 agents adapt their recursive reasoning depth to match opponent sophistication, outperforming humans in one task.
arXiv:2601. 19082v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed as autonomous agents that negotiate, coordinate, and act on behalf of users.
arXiv:2608. 12125v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: As LLM-based agents with user-instructed goals are becoming widely deployed, they increasingly encounter each other in strategic interactions, and face challenges of finding mutually beneficial outcomes.
arXiv:2608. 13787v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI agents increasingly act on their users' behalf, handling tasks such as scheduling meetings, comparing offers, and haggling over prices.
arXiv:2606. 30454v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as agents in simulations of social systems, yet it remains unclear when their behavior can be interpreted as a faithful proxy for human decision-making.
arXiv:2608.18265v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: We introduce a general, easy-to-implement AI-based method for modeling and analyzing the structure and complexity of human behavior. We assig...
arXiv:2605. 29874v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Do next-generation LLM agents inherit the cooperative biases documented in their predecessors, or does scale and provider diversity reshape equilibrium behaviour in competitive multi-agent settings?
The paper presents an AI-based method that uses a large language model to emulate human decision-making by assigning it a "type vector" describing traits such as Altruism and Risk Aversion. By varying these dimensions and values, the authors fit the model to over 119,000 decisions from 78,657 participants in 10 classic economic games, finding that three dimensions—Risk Aversion, Strategic Sophistication, and Trust—sufficiently capture human behavior. The resulting type clusters, fewer than a dozen, predict behavior in new games, suggesting a low-dimensional, portable representation of human behavior across diverse settings.