Game-theoretic LLM: Agent Workflow for Negotiation Games

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2411.05990v2
• Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2024 05:46:46 GMT
• Title: Game-theoretic LLM: Agent Workflow for Negotiation Games
• Authors: Wenyue Hua, Ollie Liu, Lingyao Li, Alfonso Amayuelas, Julie Chen, Lucas Jiang, Mingyu Jin, Lizhou Fan, Fei Sun, William Wang, Xintong Wang, Yongfeng Zhang,
• Abstract summary: This paper investigates the rationality of large language models (LLMs) in strategic decision-making contexts. We design multiple game-theoretic that guide the reasoning and decision-making processes of LLMs. The findings have implications for the development of more robust and strategically sound AI agents.
• Score: 30.83905391503607
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: This paper investigates the rationality of large language models (LLMs) in strategic decision-making contexts, specifically within the framework of game theory. We evaluate several state-of-the-art LLMs across a spectrum of complete-information and incomplete-information games. Our findings reveal that LLMs frequently deviate from rational strategies, particularly as the complexity of the game increases with larger payoff matrices or deeper sequential trees. To address these limitations, we design multiple game-theoretic workflows that guide the reasoning and decision-making processes of LLMs. These workflows aim to enhance the models' ability to compute Nash Equilibria and make rational choices, even under conditions of uncertainty and incomplete information. Experimental results demonstrate that the adoption of these workflows significantly improves the rationality and robustness of LLMs in game-theoretic tasks. Specifically, with the workflow, LLMs exhibit marked improvements in identifying optimal strategies, achieving near-optimal allocations in negotiation scenarios, and reducing susceptibility to exploitation during negotiations. Furthermore, we explore the meta-strategic considerations of whether it is rational for agents to adopt such workflows, recognizing that the decision to use or forgo the workflow constitutes a game-theoretic issue in itself. Our research contributes to a deeper understanding of LLMs' decision-making capabilities in strategic contexts and provides insights into enhancing their rationality through structured workflows. The findings have implications for the development of more robust and strategically sound AI agents capable of navigating complex interactive environments. Code and data supporting this study are available at \url{https://github.com/Wenyueh/game_theory}.

Related papers

• Empowering LLMs in Decision Games through Algorithmic Data Synthesis [29.128280701799074]
  Decision-making games serve as ideal sandboxes for evaluating and enhancing the reasoning abilities of Large Language Models. We design data synthesis strategies and curate extensive offline datasets from two classic games, Doudizhu and Go. We develop a suite of techniques to effectively incorporate this data into LLM training, resulting in two novel agents: Mastermind-Dou and Mastermind-Go.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-18T07:30:29Z)
• ReMA: Learning to Meta-think for LLMs with Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning [54.787341008881036]
  We introduce Reinforced Meta-thinking Agents (ReMA), a novel framework that leverages Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning (MARL) to elicit meta-thinking behaviors. ReMA decouples the reasoning process into two hierarchical agents: a high-level meta-thinking agent responsible for generating strategic oversight and plans, and a low-level reasoning agent for detailed executions. Experimental results demonstrate that ReMA outperforms single-agent RL baselines on complex reasoning tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-12T16:05:31Z)
• ARIES: Autonomous Reasoning with LLMs on Interactive Thought Graph Environments [7.508204100423766]
  We introduce ARIES, a multi-agent architecture for reasoning with LLMs. We observe that using off-the-shelf LLMs as policy agents with no supervised fine-tuning (SFT) can yield up to $29%$ higher accuracy on HumanEval. We also conduct a thorough analysis of observed failure modes, highlighting that limitations on LLM sizes and the depth of problem decomposition can be seen as challenges to scaling LLM-guided reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-28T16:28:13Z)
• EVOLvE: Evaluating and Optimizing LLMs For Exploration [76.66831821738927]
  Large language models (LLMs) remain under-studied in scenarios requiring optimal decision-making under uncertainty. We measure LLMs' (in)ability to make optimal decisions in bandits, a state-less reinforcement learning setting relevant to many applications. Motivated by the existence of optimal exploration algorithms, we propose efficient ways to integrate this algorithmic knowledge into LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-08T17:54:03Z)
• Cognitive LLMs: Towards Integrating Cognitive Architectures and Large Language Models for Manufacturing Decision-making [51.737762570776006]
  LLM-ACTR is a novel neuro-symbolic architecture that provides human-aligned and versatile decision-making. Our framework extracts and embeds knowledge of ACT-R's internal decision-making process as latent neural representations. Our experiments on novel Design for Manufacturing tasks show both improved task performance as well as improved grounded decision-making capability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-17T11:49:53Z)
• Meta Reasoning for Large Language Models [58.87183757029041]
  We introduce Meta-Reasoning Prompting (MRP), a novel and efficient system prompting method for large language models (LLMs) MRP guides LLMs to dynamically select and apply different reasoning methods based on the specific requirements of each task. We evaluate the effectiveness of MRP through comprehensive benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-17T16:14:11Z)
• On the Hardness of Faithful Chain-of-Thought Reasoning in Large Language Models [25.029579061612456]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly being employed in real-world applications in critical domains such as healthcare. It is important to ensure that the Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning generated by these models faithfully captures their underlying behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-15T13:16:44Z)
• STRIDE: A Tool-Assisted LLM Agent Framework for Strategic and Interactive Decision-Making [43.734386326024016]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have revolutionized natural language processing, showing remarkable linguistic proficiency and reasoning capabilities. This paper presents a novel framework equipped with memory and specialized tools to enhance their strategic decision-making capabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-25T23:25:10Z)
• Fine-Tuning Large Vision-Language Models as Decision-Making Agents via Reinforcement Learning [79.38140606606126]
  We propose an algorithmic framework that fine-tunes vision-language models (VLMs) with reinforcement learning (RL) Our framework provides a task description and then prompts the VLM to generate chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning. We demonstrate that our proposed framework enhances the decision-making capabilities of VLM agents across various tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-16T17:50:19Z)
• GTBench: Uncovering the Strategic Reasoning Limitations of LLMs via Game-Theoretic Evaluations [87.99872683336395]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are integrated into critical real-world applications. This paper evaluates LLMs' reasoning abilities in competitive environments. We first propose GTBench, a language-driven environment composing 10 widely recognized tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-19T18:23:36Z)
• ALYMPICS: LLM Agents Meet Game Theory -- Exploring Strategic Decision-Making with AI Agents [77.34720446306419]
  Alympics is a systematic simulation framework utilizing Large Language Model (LLM) agents for game theory research. Alympics creates a versatile platform for studying complex game theory problems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-06T16:03:46Z)
• Improving Large Language Models in Event Relation Logical Prediction [33.88499005859982]
  Event relation extraction is a challenging task that demands thorough semantic understanding and rigorous logical reasoning. In this paper, we conduct an in-depth investigation to systematically explore the capability of LLMs in understanding and applying event relation logic. Our study reveals that LLMs are not logically consistent reasoners, which results in their suboptimal performance on tasks that need rigorous reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-13T14:53:06Z)

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.