arXiv:2507. 19593v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Classical game-theoretic models typically assume rational agents, complete information, and common knowledge of payoffs - assumptions that are often violated in real-world MAS characterized by uncertainty, misaligned perceptions, and nested beliefs.
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.
arXiv:2404. 02039v5 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Game environments provide rich, controllable settings that stimulate many aspects of real-world complexity.
arXiv:2507.19364v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: The integration of Large Language Models (LLMs) into social simulation has generated considerable enthusiasm, but also raises substantial methodolo...
The paper investigates why large language models (LLMs) struggle in strategic decision-making under incomplete information. It identifies two key gaps: an observation‑belief gap where LLMs’ internal representations of game states are accurate but brittle, and a belief‑action gap where converting these internal beliefs into actions is weak, leading to suboptimal payoffs. Experiments with Llama 3.1, Qwen3, and gpt‑oss confirm that acting optimally on decoded beliefs would improve outcomes in most games, highlighting a bottleneck in belief‑to‑action conversion.
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:2606. 09832v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: As AI systems evolve from single conversational agents to complex multi-agent architectures, a critical design dimension has been overlooked: how the social identity of individual agents shapes human behavior within the collaboration.
arXiv:2607. 26120v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs)-powered multi-agent systems are increasingly deployed in mixed-motive environments, where agents operate under asymmetric information and strategic deception due to conflicting or hidden objectives.
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.
The paper examines how large language model (LLM) based graphical user interface (GUI) agents respond to digital nudges. Using a randomized online shopping experiment with 3,600 agents across six frontier models, it finds that agents are vulnerable to both automatic and reflective nudges. The study shows that the agents’ reasoning configuration moderates these effects in opposite directions—reducing susceptibility to automatic nudges while increasing it to reflective social influence nudges—and that this redirection is systematically linked to model scale.
The study examines how large language model (LLM)–based graphical user interface (GUI) agents respond to digital nudges. Using Dual‑Process Theory, researchers tested 3,600 agents across six frontier models in an online shopping experiment and found that the agents were susceptible to both automatic (Type 1) and reflective (Type 2) nudges. The agents’ reasoning configuration moderated these effects in opposite directions: extensive reasoning reduced susceptibility to automatic default nudges but increased susceptibility to reflective social‑influence nudges, with the effect systematically varying by model scale.
The paper presents a systematic mapping of recent chess research involving humans, engines, neural and reinforcement‑learning systems, large language models (LLMs), and hybrid approaches. It identifies 84 core study families and classifies them by agent type, strategic‑reasoning stages, and evaluation dimensions, highlighting a strong focus on situation assessment, evaluation, and action selection while noting gaps in planning, explanation, metacognition, and human–AI collaboration. The study also distinguishes hybrid systems by integration timing and cautions that improved human performance in evaluations does not automatically imply human–AI synergy.
arXiv:2510. 11503v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Games have long been a microcosm for studying planning and reasoning in both natural and artificial intelligence (AI), often focusing on expert-level or even super-human play.