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.
Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.
arXiv:2609.07943v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: There is significant uncertainty about whether abstractions like beliefs or desires usefully describe the behavior of large language models (LLMs). In...
arXiv:2608.23411v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM value studies often merge questionnaire ratings, pairwise choices, and values inferred from generated text into one profile. That merge assumes tha...
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: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.
The paper investigates how large language and visual‑language models used in autonomous vehicles inherit human driver biases when deciding whether to yield to pedestrians. It introduces two new bias‑testing methods—All Else Being Equal and Self‑Consistency tests—to evaluate these models. Results reveal that the models’ yielding decisions are influenced by pedestrian attributes such as gender, ethnicity, religion, disability, age, skin tone, and socio‑economic status, with varying patterns across models.
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.