ArticleScientific reports2024
Strategic behavior of large language models and the role of game structure versus contextual framing.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparing AI and human decision-making mechanisms in daily collaborative experiments.iScience · 2025Article
- Static network structure cannot stabilize cooperation among large language model agents.PloS one · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper investigates the strategic behavior of large language models (LLMs) across various game-theoretic settings, scrutinizing the interplay between game structure and contextual framing in decision-making. We focus our analysis on three advanced LLMs-GPT-3.5, GPT-4, and LLaMa-2-and how they navigate both the intrinsic aspects of different games and the nuances of their surrounding contexts. Our results highlight discernible patterns in each model's strategic approach. GPT-3.5 shows significant sensitivity to context but lags in its capacity for abstract strategic decision making. Conversely, both GPT-4 and LLaMa-2 demonstrate a more balanced sensitivity to game structures and contexts, albeit with crucial differences. Specifically, GPT-4 prioritizes the internal mechanics of the game over its contextual backdrop but does so with only a coarse differentiation among game types. In contrast, LLaMa-2 reflects a more granular understanding of individual game structures, while also giving due weight to contextual elements. This suggests that LLaMa-2 is better equipped to navigate the subtleties of different strategic scenarios while also incorporating context into its decision-making, whereas GPT-4 adopts a more generalized, structure-centric strategy.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.