Strategic Tradeoffs Between Humans and AI in Multi-Agent Bargaining

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2509.09071v3
• Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2025 22:19:28 GMT
• Title: Strategic Tradeoffs Between Humans and AI in Multi-Agent Bargaining
• Authors: Crystal Qian, Kehang Zhu, John Horton, Benjamin S. Manning, Vivian Tsai, James Wexler, Nithum Thain,
• Abstract summary: We compare outcomes and behavioral dynamics across humans, large language models, and Bayesian agents in a dynamic negotiation setting.<n>We find that performance parity can conceal fundamental differences in process and alignment.<n>This work provides a baseline for future studies in more applied, variable-rich environments.
• Score: 6.455342700410145
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: As large language models (LLMs) are increasingly embedded in collaborative human activities such as business negotiations and group coordination, it becomes critical to evaluate both the performance gains they can achieve and how they interact in dynamic, multi-agent environments. Unlike traditional statistical agents such as Bayesian models, which may excel under well-specified conditions, large language models (LLMs) can generalize across diverse, real-world scenarios, raising new questions about how their strategies and behaviors compare to those of humans and other agent types. In this work, we compare outcomes and behavioral dynamics across humans (N = 216), LLMs (GPT-4o, Gemini 1.5 Pro), and Bayesian agents in a dynamic negotiation setting under identical conditions. Bayesian agents extract the highest surplus through aggressive optimization, at the cost of frequent trade rejections. Humans and LLMs achieve similar overall surplus, but through distinct behaviors: LLMs favor conservative, concessionary trades with few rejections, while humans employ more strategic, risk-taking, and fairness-oriented behaviors. Thus, we find that performance parity -- a common benchmark in agent evaluation -- can conceal fundamental differences in process and alignment, which are critical for practical deployment in real-world coordination tasks. By establishing foundational behavioral baselines under matched conditions, this work provides a baseline for future studies in more applied, variable-rich environments.

Related papers

• Evaluating Generalization Capabilities of LLM-Based Agents in Mixed-Motive Scenarios Using Concordia [100.74015791021044]
  Large Language Model (LLM) agents have demonstrated impressive capabilities for social interaction.<n>Existing evaluation methods fail to measure how well these capabilities generalize to novel social situations.<n>We present empirical results from the NeurIPS 2024 Concordia Contest, where agents were evaluated on their ability to achieve mutual gains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-03T00:11:05Z)
• How Far Can LLMs Emulate Human Behavior?: A Strategic Analysis via the Buy-and-Sell Negotiation Game [0.8353024005684598]
  This work proposes a methodology to quantitatively evaluate the human emotional and behavioral imitation and strategic decision-making capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>Specifically, we assign different personas to multiple LLMs and conduct negotiations between a Buyer and a Seller, comprehensively analyzing outcomes such as win rates, transaction prices, and SHAP values.<n>Our experimental results show that models with higher existing benchmark scores tend to achieve better negotiation performance overall.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-22T09:07:29Z)
• A Dual-Agent Adversarial Framework for Robust Generalization in Deep Reinforcement Learning [7.923577336744156]
  We propose a dual-agent adversarial policy learning framework.<n>This framework allows agents to spontaneously learn the underlying semantics without introducing any human prior knowledge.<n>Experiments show that the adversarial process significantly improves the generalization performance of both agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-29T02:36:47Z)
• Factorised Active Inference for Strategic Multi-Agent Interactions [1.9389881806157316]
  Two complementary approaches can be integrated to this end.<n>The Active Inference framework (AIF) describes how agents employ a generative model to adapt their beliefs about and behaviour within their environment.<n>Game theory formalises strategic interactions between agents with potentially competing objectives.<n>We propose a factorisation of the generative model whereby each agent maintains explicit, individual-level beliefs about the internal states of other agents, and uses them for strategic planning in a joint context.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-11T21:04:43Z)
• From Novice to Expert: LLM Agent Policy Optimization via Step-wise Reinforcement Learning [62.54484062185869]
  We introduce StepAgent, which utilizes step-wise reward to optimize the agent's reinforcement learning process.<n>We propose implicit-reward and inverse reinforcement learning techniques to facilitate agent reflection and policy adjustment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-06T10:35:11Z)
• CoPS: Empowering LLM Agents with Provable Cross-Task Experience Sharing [70.25689961697523]
  We propose a generalizable algorithm that enhances sequential reasoning by cross-task experience sharing and selection. Our work bridges the gap between existing sequential reasoning paradigms and validates the effectiveness of leveraging cross-task experiences.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-22T03:59:53Z)
• Moral Alignment for LLM Agents [3.7414804164475983]
  We introduce the design of reward functions that explicitly and transparently encode core human values.<n>We evaluate our approach using the traditional philosophical frameworks of Deontological Ethics and Utilitarianism.<n>We show how moral fine-tuning can be deployed to enable an agent to unlearn a previously developed selfish strategy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-02T15:09:36Z)
• AntEval: Evaluation of Social Interaction Competencies in LLM-Driven Agents [65.16893197330589]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated their ability to replicate human behaviors across a wide range of scenarios. However, their capability in handling complex, multi-character social interactions has yet to be fully explored. We introduce the Multi-Agent Interaction Evaluation Framework (AntEval), encompassing a novel interaction framework and evaluation methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-12T11:18:00Z)
• DCIR: Dynamic Consistency Intrinsic Reward for Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning [84.22561239481901]
  We propose a new approach that enables agents to learn whether their behaviors should be consistent with that of other agents. We evaluate DCIR in multiple environments including Multi-agent Particle, Google Research Football and StarCraft II Micromanagement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-10T06:03:57Z)
• Quantifying Agent Interaction in Multi-agent Reinforcement Learning for Cost-efficient Generalization [63.554226552130054]
  Generalization poses a significant challenge in Multi-agent Reinforcement Learning (MARL) The extent to which an agent is influenced by unseen co-players depends on the agent's policy and the specific scenario. We present the Level of Influence (LoI), a metric quantifying the interaction intensity among agents within a given scenario and environment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-11T06:09:26Z)
• ProAgent: Building Proactive Cooperative Agents with Large Language Models [89.53040828210945]
  ProAgent is a novel framework that harnesses large language models to create proactive agents. ProAgent can analyze the present state, and infer the intentions of teammates from observations. ProAgent exhibits a high degree of modularity and interpretability, making it easily integrated into various coordination scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-22T10:36:56Z)
• AgentVerse: Facilitating Multi-Agent Collaboration and Exploring Emergent Behaviors [93.38830440346783]
  We propose a multi-agent framework framework that can collaboratively adjust its composition as a greater-than-the-sum-of-its-parts system. Our experiments demonstrate that framework framework can effectively deploy multi-agent groups that outperform a single agent. In view of these behaviors, we discuss some possible strategies to leverage positive ones and mitigate negative ones for improving the collaborative potential of multi-agent groups.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-21T16:47:11Z)
• ERMAS: Becoming Robust to Reward Function Sim-to-Real Gaps in Multi-Agent Simulations [110.72725220033983]
  Epsilon-Robust Multi-Agent Simulation (ERMAS) is a framework for learning AI policies that are robust to such multiagent sim-to-real gaps. ERMAS learns tax policies that are robust to changes in agent risk aversion, improving social welfare by up to 15% in complextemporal simulations. In particular, ERMAS learns tax policies that are robust to changes in agent risk aversion, improving social welfare by up to 15% in complextemporal simulations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-10T04:32:20Z)
• Scalable Multi-Agent Inverse Reinforcement Learning via Actor-Attention-Critic [54.2180984002807]
  Multi-agent adversarial inverse reinforcement learning (MA-AIRL) is a recent approach that applies single-agent AIRL to multi-agent problems. We propose a multi-agent inverse RL algorithm that is more sample-efficient and scalable than previous works.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-24T20:30:45Z)

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.