LLMs as Deceptive Agents: How Role-Based Prompting Induces Semantic Ambiguity in Puzzle Tasks
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2504.02254v1
- Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2025 03:45:58 GMT
- Title: LLMs as Deceptive Agents: How Role-Based Prompting Induces Semantic Ambiguity in Puzzle Tasks
- Authors: Seunghyun Yoo,
- Abstract summary: This study is inspired by the popular puzzle game "Connections"<n>We compare puzzles produced through zero-shot prompting, role-injected adversarial prompts, and human-crafted examples.<n>We demonstrate that explicit adversarial agent behaviors significantly heighten semantic ambiguity.
- Score: 0.0
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: Recent advancements in Large Language Models (LLMs) have not only showcased impressive creative capabilities but also revealed emerging agentic behaviors that exploit linguistic ambiguity in adversarial settings. In this study, we investigate how an LLM, acting as an autonomous agent, leverages semantic ambiguity to generate deceptive puzzles that mislead and challenge human users. Inspired by the popular puzzle game "Connections", we systematically compare puzzles produced through zero-shot prompting, role-injected adversarial prompts, and human-crafted examples, with an emphasis on understanding the underlying agent decision-making processes. Employing computational analyses with HateBERT to quantify semantic ambiguity, alongside subjective human evaluations, we demonstrate that explicit adversarial agent behaviors significantly heighten semantic ambiguity -- thereby increasing cognitive load and reducing fairness in puzzle solving. These findings provide critical insights into the emergent agentic qualities of LLMs and underscore important ethical considerations for evaluating and safely deploying autonomous language systems in both educational technologies and entertainment.
Related papers
- 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) - Compromising Embodied Agents with Contextual Backdoor Attacks [69.71630408822767]
Large language models (LLMs) have transformed the development of embodied intelligence.
This paper uncovers a significant backdoor security threat within this process.
By poisoning just a few contextual demonstrations, attackers can covertly compromise the contextual environment of a black-box LLM.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-08-06T01:20:12Z) - Rethinking ChatGPT's Success: Usability and Cognitive Behaviors Enabled by Auto-regressive LLMs' Prompting [5.344199202349884]
We analyze the structure of modalities within both two types of Large Language Models and six task-specific channels during deployment.
We examine the stimulation of diverse cognitive behaviors in LLMs through the adoption of free-form text and verbal contexts.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-05-17T00:19:41Z) - Tuning-Free Accountable Intervention for LLM Deployment -- A
Metacognitive Approach [55.613461060997004]
Large Language Models (LLMs) have catalyzed transformative advances across a spectrum of natural language processing tasks.
We propose an innovative textitmetacognitive approach, dubbed textbfCLEAR, to equip LLMs with capabilities for self-aware error identification and correction.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-03-08T19:18:53Z) - Puzzle Solving using Reasoning of Large Language Models: A Survey [1.9939549451457024]
This survey examines the capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) in puzzle solving.
Our findings highlight the disparity between LLM capabilities and human-like reasoning.
The survey underscores the necessity for novel strategies and richer datasets to advance LLMs' puzzle-solving proficiency.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-17T14:19:38Z) - Igniting Language Intelligence: The Hitchhiker's Guide From
Chain-of-Thought Reasoning to Language Agents [80.5213198675411]
Large language models (LLMs) have dramatically enhanced the field of language intelligence.
LLMs leverage the intriguing chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning techniques, obliging them to formulate intermediate steps en route to deriving an answer.
Recent research endeavors have extended CoT reasoning methodologies to nurture the development of autonomous language agents.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-11-20T14:30:55Z) - tagE: Enabling an Embodied Agent to Understand Human Instructions [3.943519623674811]
We introduce a novel system known as task and argument grounding for Embodied agents (tagE)
At its core, our system employs an inventive neural network model designed to extract a series of tasks from complex task instructions expressed in natural language.
Our proposed model adopts an encoder-decoder framework enriched with nested decoding to effectively extract tasks and their corresponding arguments from these intricate instructions.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-24T08:17:48Z) - Re-Reading Improves Reasoning in Large Language Models [87.46256176508376]
We introduce a simple, yet general and effective prompting method, Re2, to enhance the reasoning capabilities of off-the-shelf Large Language Models (LLMs)
Unlike most thought-eliciting prompting methods, such as Chain-of-Thought (CoT), Re2 shifts the focus to the input by processing questions twice, thereby enhancing the understanding process.
We evaluate Re2 on extensive reasoning benchmarks across 14 datasets, spanning 112 experiments, to validate its effectiveness and generality.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-09-12T14:36:23Z) - Encouraging Divergent Thinking in Large Language Models through Multi-Agent Debate [85.3444184685235]
We propose a Multi-Agent Debate (MAD) framework, in which multiple agents express their arguments in the state of "tit for tat" and a judge manages the debate process to obtain a final solution.
Our framework encourages divergent thinking in LLMs which would be helpful for tasks that require deep levels of contemplation.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-05-30T15:25:45Z) - Large Language Models are In-Context Semantic Reasoners rather than
Symbolic Reasoners [75.85554779782048]
Large Language Models (LLMs) have excited the natural language and machine learning community over recent years.
Despite of numerous successful applications, the underlying mechanism of such in-context capabilities still remains unclear.
In this work, we hypothesize that the learned textitsemantics of language tokens do the most heavy lifting during the reasoning process.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-05-24T07:33:34Z)
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.