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.
arXiv:2609.34284v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Personalized LLMs must decide, for each stored preference, whether the current context calls for applying or suppressing it, which we call its appl...
arXiv:2606. 09843v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) give stable answers to personality questionnaires, yet these self-reports fail to predict how the models behave.
arXiv:2607. 10202v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Cross-model comparisons read divergence in value dispositions as evidence that language models hold individuated values.
arXiv:2606. 20205v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Psychological instruments designed for humans are increasingly used to assign large language models (LLMs) stable psychological profiles that affect their usability, safety assessment, and use as proxies for human participants in research.
arXiv:2609.15467v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Adding answer options can lower multiple-choice scores without improving assessment validity. Turkish MMLU Pro examines this distinction using 12,000...
The study investigates bias in large language model (LLM) judges by having ten LLMs evaluate narrative constraint selections rather than generated text. Results show that self-preference largely disappears under blind evaluation when quality and evaluator severity are controlled, but self- and other-labels alone shift scores bidirectionally when quality is matched. The authors conclude that authorship attribution drives evaluation bias and that open-ended, ground‑truth‑free tasks can effectively study LLM judge behavior.
arXiv:2606. 09843v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) produce stable self-reports on personality inventories, but these self-reports do not predict observed behavior.
arXiv:2607. 23976v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Appending a two-word confirmation tag to a decision question -- "Is X the better choice?
PriceBench is a diagnostic benchmark that extracts price, quality, and brand preferences from large language models (LLMs) by analyzing their hotel booking choices. Using a logit choice model, the study evaluated 28 LLMs from eight providers across 3,600 booking tasks involving 179 New York City hotels. Results show that more capable LLMs exhibit stronger, more consistent preferences, while weaker models either lock onto a single position or show near-indifference, with significant variation in price sensitivity and price/quality trade-offs across providers.
arXiv:2602.11328v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: As people turn to LLMs for social advice, understanding their behavior in such contexts becomes essential. In this work, we focus on behavioral dis...
arXiv:2608. 10703v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) increasingly act in interactive settings where their behavioral styles affect user experience, safety, and downstream decision making.