Collective cooperation without individual fidelity in LLM agents

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.30454v1
• Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2026 15:22:21 GMT
• Title: Collective cooperation without individual fidelity in LLM agents
• Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as agents in simulations of social systems.<n>It remains unclear when their behavior can be interpreted as a faithful proxy for human decision-making.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as agents in simulations of social systems, yet it remains unclear when their behavior can be interpreted as a faithful proxy for human decision-making. Here we test LLM agents against a direct empirical benchmark: a large-scale networked Prisoner's Dilemma experiment with human participants. Using the same interaction protocol, payoff structure, and network topologies, we compare nine open-weight LLMs with the human data. The selected model reproduces several macro-level features of cooperation dynamics, including the early decline and later stabilization of cooperation. This aggregate agreement, however, does not extend uniformly to finer levels of behavior. LLM populations underestimate individual-level heterogeneity and generate conditional cooperation patterns that differ from those observed in humans. Adding a fraction of random agents improves some aspects of micro-level agreement, but does not remove the mismatch in decision rules. These findings reveal a macro--micro dissociation in LLM-based social agents: collective outcomes can appear human-like even when the underlying behavioral distributions and mechanisms are not. They suggest that validating LLM agents as human surrogates requires comparisons across aggregate dynamics, individual heterogeneity, and context-dependent decision rules, rather than outcome-level agreement alone.

Related papers

• From Process Loss to Assembly Bonus: Human-Grounded Diagnosis of Multi-Agent LLM Collaboration [11.269223379412315]
  We compare human group chats with matched LLM deliberation traces on Wason-style deductive reasoning.<n>We show the same assembly bonus asymmetry: discussion improves the average member more often than the best initial member.<n>These results suggest that LLM groups can reproduce some outcome-level patterns of human deliberation while diverging in the mechanisms that generate assembly bonus and process loss.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-06T17:58:09Z)
• Do LLMs Take Care of Their Own? Similarity Signals Can Induce Cooperation [29.79569269141268]
  This paper introduces the first framework for evaluating LLM decision making when agents are provided with graded similarity signals.<n>We find that different LLM models vary drastically in how they navigate similarity signals.<n>Experiments also show that the dataset based on which the similarity signal is computed has small to no impact on induced cooperation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-12T14:47:15Z)
• Group Selection Promotes Prosocial Prompts in Populations of LLM Agents [1.7004466773233589]
  We study whether group selection can promote cooperation in populations of large language model (LLM) agents.<n>Under group selection, prompts from high-performing groups are transmitted, thereby promoting prosociality and stabilizing cooperation.<n>Preliminary findings show that, when informed about the selection mechanism, GPT-5.4 preemptively and gradually adjusts first-generation donations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-22T13:47:19Z)
• Stop Drawing Scientific Claims from LLM Social Simulations Without Robustness Audits [11.902271500463934]
  Generative agents bring new expressive power to agent-based modeling.<n>Small perturbations that appear minor to researchers can cascade into macro-level outcomes.<n>We introduce TRAILS, a robustness-audit taxonomy spanning three levels of simulation design.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-17T00:21:53Z)
• Network Effects and Agreement Drift in LLM Debates [0.0]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated an unprecedented ability to simulate human-like social behaviors.<n>This paper uses a network generation model with controlled homophily and class sizes to examine how LLM agents behave collectively in multi-round debates.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-13T11:16:58Z)
• Position: AI Agents Are Not (Yet) a Panacea for Social Simulation [62.891898598784415]
  Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have spurred growing interest in using LLM-integrated agents for social simulation.<n>This position paper argues that LLM-based agents are not (yet) a panacea for social simulation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-19T06:35:07Z)
• Can Finetuing LLMs on Small Human Samples Increase Heterogeneity, Alignment, and Belief-Action Coherence? [9.310571879281186]
  Large language models (LLMs) can serve as substitutes for human participants in survey and experimental research.<n>LLMs often fail to align with real human behavior, exhibiting limited diversity, systematic misalignment for minority subgroups, insufficient within-group variance, and discrepancies between stated beliefs and actions.<n>This study examines whether fine-tuning on a small subset of human survey data, such as that obtainable from a pilot study, can mitigate these issues and yield realistic simulated outcomes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-26T09:50:42Z)
• How large language models judge and influence human cooperation [82.07571393247476]
  We assess how state-of-the-art language models judge cooperative actions.<n>We observe a remarkable agreement in evaluating cooperation against good opponents.<n>We show that the differences revealed between models can significantly impact the prevalence of cooperation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-30T09:14:42Z)
• Corrupted by Reasoning: Reasoning Language Models Become Free-Riders in Public Goods Games [87.5673042805229]
  How large language models balance self-interest and collective well-being is a critical challenge for ensuring alignment, robustness, and safe deployment.<n>We adapt a public goods game with institutional choice from behavioral economics, allowing us to observe how different LLMs navigate social dilemmas.<n>Surprisingly, we find that reasoning LLMs, such as the o1 series, struggle significantly with cooperation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-29T15:02:47Z)
• Modeling Earth-Scale Human-Like Societies with One Billion Agents [54.465233996410156]
  Light Society is an agent-based simulation framework.<n>It formalizes social processes as structured transitions of agent and environment states.<n>It supports efficient simulation of societies with over one billion agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-07T09:14:12Z)
• Static network structure cannot stabilize cooperation among Large Language Model agents [6.868298200380496]
  Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to model human social behavior. This study aims to identify parallels in cooperative behavior between LLMs and humans.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-15T15:52:15Z)
• Large Language Model-based Human-Agent Collaboration for Complex Task Solving [94.3914058341565]
  We introduce the problem of Large Language Models (LLMs)-based human-agent collaboration for complex task-solving. We propose a Reinforcement Learning-based Human-Agent Collaboration method, ReHAC. This approach includes a policy model designed to determine the most opportune stages for human intervention within the task-solving process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-20T11:03:36Z)
• Exploring Collaboration Mechanisms for LLM Agents: A Social Psychology View [60.80731090755224]
  This paper probes the collaboration mechanisms among contemporary NLP systems by practical experiments with theoretical insights. We fabricate four unique societies' comprised of LLM agents, where each agent is characterized by a specific trait' (easy-going or overconfident) and engages in collaboration with a distinct thinking pattern' (debate or reflection) Our results further illustrate that LLM agents manifest human-like social behaviors, such as conformity and consensus reaching, mirroring social psychology theories.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-03T15:05:52Z)
• 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.