Do LLM Personas Dream of Bull Markets? Comparing Human and AI Investment Strategies Through the Lens of the Five-Factor Model

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2411.05801v1
• Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2024 02:50:41 GMT
• Title: Do LLM Personas Dream of Bull Markets? Comparing Human and AI Investment Strategies Through the Lens of the Five-Factor Model
• Authors: Harris Borman, Anna Leontjeva, Luiz Pizzato, Max Kun Jiang, Dan Jermyn,
• Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated the ability to adopt a personality and behave in a human-like manner. This study investigated whether an LLM persona with a specific Big Five personality profile would perform an investment task similarly to a human with the same personality traits. We found that LLMs are able to generalise traits into expected behaviours in three areas: learning style, impulsivity and risk appetite.
• Score: 0.3495246564946556
• License:
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated the ability to adopt a personality and behave in a human-like manner. There is a large body of research that investigates the behavioural impacts of personality in less obvious areas such as investment attitudes or creative decision making. In this study, we investigated whether an LLM persona with a specific Big Five personality profile would perform an investment task similarly to a human with the same personality traits. We used a simulated investment task to determine if these results could be generalised into actual behaviours. In this simulated environment, our results show these personas produced meaningful behavioural differences in all assessed categories, with these behaviours generally being consistent with expectations derived from human research. We found that LLMs are able to generalise traits into expected behaviours in three areas: learning style, impulsivity and risk appetite while environmental attitudes could not be accurately represented. In addition, we showed that LLMs produce behaviour that is more reflective of human behaviour in a simulation environment compared to a survey environment.

Related papers

• Can Machines Think Like Humans? A Behavioral Evaluation of LLM-Agents in Dictator Games [7.504095239018173]
  Large Language Model (LLM)-based agents increasingly undertake real-world tasks and engage with human society. This study investigates how different personas and experimental framings affect these AI agents' altruistic behavior. Despite being trained on extensive human-generated data, these AI agents cannot accurately predict human decisions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-28T17:47:41Z)
• Quantifying AI Psychology: A Psychometrics Benchmark for Large Language Models [57.518784855080334]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated exceptional task-solving capabilities, increasingly adopting roles akin to human-like assistants. This paper presents a framework for investigating psychology dimension in LLMs, including psychological identification, assessment dataset curation, and assessment with results validation. We introduce a comprehensive psychometrics benchmark for LLMs that covers six psychological dimensions: personality, values, emotion, theory of mind, motivation, and intelligence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-25T16:09:08Z)
• Is Cognition and Action Consistent or Not: Investigating Large Language Model's Personality [12.162460438332152]
  We investigate the reliability of Large Language Models (LLMs) in professing human-like personality traits through responses to personality questionnaires. Our goal is to evaluate the consistency between LLMs' professed personality inclinations and their actual "behavior" We propose hypotheses for the observed results based on psychological theories and metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-22T16:32:08Z)
• Systematic Biases in LLM Simulations of Debates [12.933509143906141]
  We study the limitations of Large Language Models in simulating human interactions. Our findings indicate a tendency for LLM agents to conform to the model's inherent social biases. These results underscore the need for further research to develop methods that help agents overcome these biases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-06T14:51:55Z)
• LLMs Simulate Big Five Personality Traits: Further Evidence [51.13560635563004]
  We analyze the personality traits simulated by Llama2, GPT4, and Mixtral. This contributes to the broader understanding of the capabilities of LLMs to simulate personality traits.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-31T13:45:25Z)
• Do LLMs exhibit human-like response biases? A case study in survey design [66.1850490474361]
  We investigate the extent to which large language models (LLMs) reflect human response biases, if at all. We design a dataset and framework to evaluate whether LLMs exhibit human-like response biases in survey questionnaires. Our comprehensive evaluation of nine models shows that popular open and commercial LLMs generally fail to reflect human-like behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-07T15:40:43Z)
• Revisiting the Reliability of Psychological Scales on Large Language Models [62.57981196992073]
  This study aims to determine the reliability of applying personality assessments to Large Language Models. Analysis of 2,500 settings per model, including GPT-3.5, GPT-4, Gemini-Pro, and LLaMA-3.1, reveals that various LLMs show consistency in responses to the Big Five Inventory.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-31T15:03:28Z)
• Can ChatGPT Assess Human Personalities? A General Evaluation Framework [70.90142717649785]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have produced impressive results in various areas, but their potential human-like psychology is still largely unexplored. This paper presents a generic evaluation framework for LLMs to assess human personalities based on Myers Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) tests.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-01T06:16:14Z)
• Evaluating and Inducing Personality in Pre-trained Language Models [78.19379997967191]
  We draw inspiration from psychometric studies by leveraging human personality theory as a tool for studying machine behaviors. To answer these questions, we introduce the Machine Personality Inventory (MPI) tool for studying machine behaviors. MPI follows standardized personality tests, built upon the Big Five Personality Factors (Big Five) theory and personality assessment inventories. We devise a Personality Prompting (P2) method to induce LLMs with specific personalities in a controllable way.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-20T07:32:57Z)

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.