GLEE: A Unified Framework and Benchmark for Language-based Economic Environments
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.05254v1
- Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2024 17:55:35 GMT
- Title: GLEE: A Unified Framework and Benchmark for Language-based Economic Environments
- Authors: Eilam Shapira, Omer Madmon, Itamar Reinman, Samuel Joseph Amouyal, Roi Reichart, Moshe Tennenholtz,
- Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) show significant potential in economic and strategic interactions.
These questions become crucial concerning the economic and societal implications of integrating LLM-based agents into real-world data-driven systems.
We introduce a benchmark for standardizing research on two-player, sequential, language-based games.
- Score: 19.366120861935105
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) show significant potential in economic and strategic interactions, where communication via natural language is often prevalent. This raises key questions: Do LLMs behave rationally? Can they mimic human behavior? Do they tend to reach an efficient and fair outcome? What is the role of natural language in the strategic interaction? How do characteristics of the economic environment influence these dynamics? These questions become crucial concerning the economic and societal implications of integrating LLM-based agents into real-world data-driven systems, such as online retail platforms and recommender systems. While the ML community has been exploring the potential of LLMs in such multi-agent setups, varying assumptions, design choices and evaluation criteria across studies make it difficult to draw robust and meaningful conclusions. To address this, we introduce a benchmark for standardizing research on two-player, sequential, language-based games. Inspired by the economic literature, we define three base families of games with consistent parameterization, degrees of freedom and economic measures to evaluate agents' performance (self-gain), as well as the game outcome (efficiency and fairness). We develop an open-source framework for interaction simulation and analysis, and utilize it to collect a dataset of LLM vs. LLM interactions across numerous game configurations and an additional dataset of human vs. LLM interactions. Through extensive experimentation, we demonstrate how our framework and dataset can be used to: (i) compare the behavior of LLM-based agents to human players in various economic contexts; (ii) evaluate agents in both individual and collective performance measures; and (iii) quantify the effect of the economic characteristics of the environments on the behavior of agents.
Related papers
- Persuasion with Large Language Models: a Survey [49.86930318312291]
Large Language Models (LLMs) have created new disruptive possibilities for persuasive communication.
In areas such as politics, marketing, public health, e-commerce, and charitable giving, such LLM Systems have already achieved human-level or even super-human persuasiveness.
Our survey suggests that the current and future potential of LLM-based persuasion poses profound ethical and societal risks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-11-11T10:05:52Z) - Language Agents Meet Causality -- Bridging LLMs and Causal World Models [50.79984529172807]
We propose a framework that integrates causal representation learning with large language models.
This framework learns a causal world model, with causal variables linked to natural language expressions.
We evaluate the framework on causal inference and planning tasks across temporal scales and environmental complexities.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-10-25T18:36:37Z) - Designing Domain-Specific Large Language Models: The Critical Role of Fine-Tuning in Public Opinion Simulation [0.0]
This paper presents an approach for fine-tuning large language models (LLMs) using data from the UK Household Longitudinal Study.
By emulating diverse synthetic profiles, fine-tuned models capture the subtle differences across demographic groups more effectively than pre-trained versions.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-09-28T10:39:23Z) - LLM economicus? Mapping the Behavioral Biases of LLMs via Utility Theory [20.79199807796242]
Utility theory is an approach to evaluate the economic biases of large language models.
We find that the economic behavior of current LLMs is neither entirely human-like nor entirely economicus-like.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-08-05T19:00:43Z) - PersLLM: A Personified Training Approach for Large Language Models [66.16513246245401]
We propose PersLLM, integrating psychology-grounded principles of personality: social practice, consistency, and dynamic development.
We incorporate personality traits directly into the model parameters, enhancing the model's resistance to induction, promoting consistency, and supporting the dynamic evolution of personality.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-07-17T08:13:22Z) - EconNLI: Evaluating Large Language Models on Economics Reasoning [22.754757518792395]
Large Language Models (LLMs) are widely used for writing economic analysis reports or providing financial advice.
We propose a new dataset, natural language inference on economic events (EconNLI), to evaluate LLMs' knowledge and reasoning abilities in the economic domain.
Our experiments reveal that LLMs are not sophisticated in economic reasoning and may generate wrong or hallucinated answers.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-07-01T11:58:24Z) - Beyond Human Norms: Unveiling Unique Values of Large Language Models through Interdisciplinary Approaches [69.73783026870998]
This work proposes a novel framework, ValueLex, to reconstruct Large Language Models' unique value system from scratch.
Based on Lexical Hypothesis, ValueLex introduces a generative approach to elicit diverse values from 30+ LLMs.
We identify three core value dimensions, Competence, Character, and Integrity, each with specific subdimensions, revealing that LLMs possess a structured, albeit non-human, value system.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-04-19T09:44:51Z) - Explaining Large Language Models Decisions Using Shapley Values [1.223779595809275]
Large language models (LLMs) have opened up exciting possibilities for simulating human behavior and cognitive processes.
However, the validity of utilizing LLMs as stand-ins for human subjects remains uncertain.
This paper presents a novel approach based on Shapley values to interpret LLM behavior and quantify the relative contribution of each prompt component to the model's output.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-03-29T22:49:43Z) - Do LLM Agents Exhibit Social Behavior? [5.094340963261968]
State-Understanding-Value-Action (SUVA) is a framework to systematically analyze responses in social contexts.
It assesses social behavior through both their final decisions and the response generation processes leading to those decisions.
We demonstrate that utterance-based reasoning reliably predicts LLMs' final actions.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-12-23T08:46:53Z) - CLOMO: Counterfactual Logical Modification with Large Language Models [109.60793869938534]
We introduce a novel task, Counterfactual Logical Modification (CLOMO), and a high-quality human-annotated benchmark.
In this task, LLMs must adeptly alter a given argumentative text to uphold a predetermined logical relationship.
We propose an innovative evaluation metric, the Self-Evaluation Score (SES), to directly evaluate the natural language output of LLMs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-11-29T08:29:54Z) - MAgIC: Investigation of Large Language Model Powered Multi-Agent in
Cognition, Adaptability, Rationality and Collaboration [102.41118020705876]
Large Language Models (LLMs) have marked a significant advancement in the field of natural language processing.
As their applications extend into multi-agent environments, a need has arisen for a comprehensive evaluation framework.
This work introduces a novel benchmarking framework specifically tailored to assess LLMs within multi-agent settings.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-11-14T21:46:27Z)
This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.
This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.