Do as We Do, Not as You Think: the Conformity of Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2501.13381v2
• Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2025 12:44:39 GMT
• Title: Do as We Do, Not as You Think: the Conformity of Large Language Models
• Authors: Zhiyuan Weng, Guikun Chen, Wenguan Wang,
• Abstract summary: This paper presents a study on conformity in large language models (LLMs) driven collaborative AI systems.<n>We focus on three aspects: the existence of conformity, the factors influencing conformity, and potential mitigation strategies.<n>Our analysis delves into factors influencing conformity, including interaction time and majority size, and examines how the subject agent rationalizes its conforming behavior.
• Score: 46.23852835759767
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) revolutionize the field of intelligent agents, enabling collaborative multi-agent systems capable of tackling complex problems across various domains. However, the potential of conformity within these systems, analogous to phenomena like conformity bias and groupthink in human group dynamics, remains largely unexplored, raising concerns about their collective problem-solving capabilities and possible ethical implications. This paper presents a comprehensive study on conformity in LLM-driven multi-agent systems, focusing on three aspects: the existence of conformity, the factors influencing conformity, and potential mitigation strategies. In particular, we introduce BenchForm, a new conformity-oriented benchmark, featuring reasoning-intensive tasks and five distinct interaction protocols designed to probe LLMs' behavior in collaborative scenarios. Several representative LLMs are evaluated on BenchForm, using metrics such as conformity rate and independence rate to quantify conformity's impact. Our analysis delves into factors influencing conformity, including interaction time and majority size, and examines how the subject agent rationalizes its conforming behavior. Furthermore, we explore two strategies to mitigate conformity effects, i.e., developing enhanced personas and implementing a reflection mechanism. Several interesting findings regarding LLMs' conformity are derived from empirical results and case studies. We hope that these insights can pave the way for more robust and ethically-aligned collaborative AI systems. Our benchmark and code are available at BenchForm.

Related papers

• DICE: Dynamic In-Context Example Selection in LLM Agents via Efficient Knowledge Transfer [50.64531021352504]
  Large language model-based agents, empowered by in-context learning (ICL), have demonstrated strong capabilities in complex reasoning and tool-use tasks.<n>Existing approaches typically rely on example selection, including in some agentic or multi-step settings.<n>We propose DICE, a theoretically grounded ICL framework for agentic tasks that selects the most relevant demonstrations at each step of reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-31T13:42:14Z)
• Herd Behavior: Investigating Peer Influence in LLM-based Multi-Agent Systems [7.140644659869317]
  We investigate the dynamics of peer influence in multi-agent systems based on Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>We show that the gap between self-confidence and perceived confidence in peers significantly impacts an agent's likelihood to conform.<n>We find that the format in which peer information is presented plays a critical role in modulating the strength of herd behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-27T12:12:56Z)
• Adversarial Testing in LLMs: Insights into Decision-Making Vulnerabilities [5.0778942095543576]
  This paper introduces an adversarial evaluation framework designed to systematically stress-test the decision-making processes of Large Language Models.<n>We apply this framework to several state-of-the-art LLMs, including GPT-3.5, GPT-4, Gemini-1.5, and DeepSeek-V3.<n>Our findings highlight distinct behavioral patterns across models and emphasize the importance of adaptability and fairness recognition for trustworthy AI deployment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-19T14:50:44Z)
• A Survey of Frontiers in LLM Reasoning: Inference Scaling, Learning to Reason, and Agentic Systems [93.8285345915925]
  Reasoning is a fundamental cognitive process that enables logical inference, problem-solving, and decision-making. With the rapid advancement of large language models (LLMs), reasoning has emerged as a key capability that distinguishes advanced AI systems. We categorize existing methods along two dimensions: (1) Regimes, which define the stage at which reasoning is achieved; and (2) Architectures, which determine the components involved in the reasoning process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-12T01:27:49Z)
• Review of Case-Based Reasoning for LLM Agents: Theoretical Foundations, Architectural Components, and Cognitive Integration [0.0]
  Case-Based Reasoning (CBR) is a strategy that solves new problems by referencing past experiences. This paper explores how Case-Based Reasoning (CBR), a strategy that solves new problems by referencing past experiences, can be integrated into Large Language Models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-09T14:51:02Z)
• 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)
• Agentic LLM Framework for Adaptive Decision Discourse [2.4919169815423743]
  This study introduces a real-world inspired agentic Large Language Models (LLMs) framework. Unlike traditional decision-support tools, the framework emphasizes dialogue, trade-off exploration, and the emergent synergies generated by interactions among agents. Results reveal how the breadth-first exploration of alternatives fosters robust and equitable recommendation pathways.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-16T03:46:37Z)
• Reflection-Bench: Evaluating Epistemic Agency in Large Language Models [10.801745760525838]
  Epistemic agency is the ability to flexibly construct, adapt, and monitor beliefs about dynamic environments.<n>We propose Reflection-Bench, a benchmark consisting of seven tasks with long-term relevance and minimization of data leakage.<n>Our findings suggest several promising research directions, including enhancing core cognitive functions, improving cross-functional coordination, and developing adaptive processing mechanisms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-21T17:59:50Z)
• Conformity in Large Language Models [26.963909402233213]
  Conformity to incorrect responses can compromise language models' effectiveness. We adapt psychological experiments to examine the extent of conformity in state-of-the-art language models. We are the first to show that LLMs are more likely to conform when they are more uncertain in their own prediction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-16T10:16:34Z)
• Cooperative Resilience in Artificial Intelligence Multiagent Systems [2.0608564715600273]
  This paper proposes a clear definition of cooperative resilience' and a methodology for its quantitative measurement. The results highlight the crucial role of resilience metrics in analyzing how the collective system prepares for, resists, recovers from, sustains well-being, and transforms in the face of disruptions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-20T03:28:48Z)
• MR-Ben: A Meta-Reasoning Benchmark for Evaluating System-2 Thinking in LLMs [55.20845457594977]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown increasing capability in problem-solving and decision-making.<n>We present a process-based benchmark MR-Ben that demands a meta-reasoning skill.<n>Our meta-reasoning paradigm is especially suited for system-2 slow thinking.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-20T03:50:23Z)
• Efficient Adaptation in Mixed-Motive Environments via Hierarchical Opponent Modeling and Planning [51.52387511006586]
  We propose Hierarchical Opponent modeling and Planning (HOP), a novel multi-agent decision-making algorithm. HOP is hierarchically composed of two modules: an opponent modeling module that infers others' goals and learns corresponding goal-conditioned policies. HOP exhibits superior few-shot adaptation capabilities when interacting with various unseen agents, and excels in self-play scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-12T08:48:06Z)
• Learning to Break: Knowledge-Enhanced Reasoning in Multi-Agent Debate System [16.830182915504555]
  Multi-agent debate system (MAD) imitates the process of human discussion in pursuit of truth. It is challenging to make various agents perform right and highly consistent cognition due to their limited and different knowledge backgrounds. We propose a novel underlineMulti-underlineAgent underlineDebate with underlineKnowledge-underlineEnhanced framework to promote the system to find the solution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-08T06:22:12Z)
• MAgIC: Investigation of Large Language Model Powered Multi-Agent in Cognition, Adaptability, Rationality and Collaboration [98.18244218156492]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have significantly advanced natural language processing.<n>As their applications expand into multi-agent environments, there arises a need for a comprehensive evaluation framework.<n>This work introduces a novel competition-based benchmark framework to assess LLMs within multi-agent settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-14T21:46:27Z)
• The Machine Psychology of Cooperation: Can GPT models operationalise prompts for altruism, cooperation, competitiveness and selfishness in economic games? [0.0]
  We investigated the capability of the GPT-3.5 large language model (LLM) to operationalize natural language descriptions of cooperative, competitive, altruistic, and self-interested behavior. We used a prompt to describe the task environment using a similar protocol to that used in experimental psychology studies with human subjects. Our results provide evidence that LLMs can, to some extent, translate natural language descriptions of different cooperative stances into corresponding descriptions of appropriate task behaviour.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-13T17:23:16Z)

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.