ArticleNature human behaviour2025
Testing for completions that simulate altruism in early language models.
Article in Nature human behaviour, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Altruism underlies cooperative behaviours that facilitate social complexity. In late 2022 and early 2023, we tested whether particular large language models-then in widespread use-generated completions that simulated altruism when prompted with text inputs similar to those used in 'dictator game' experiments measuring human altruism. Here we report that one model in our initial study set-OpenAI's text-davinci-003-consistently generated completions that simulated payoff maximization in a non-social decision task yet simulated altruism in dictator games. Comparable completions appeared when we replicated our experiments, altered prompt phrasing, varied model parameters, altered currencies described in the prompt and studied a subsequent model, GPT-4. Furthermore, application of explainable artificial intelligence techniques showed that results changed little when instructing the system to ignore past research on the dictator or ultimatum games but changed noticeably when instructing the system to focus on the needs of particular participants in a simulated social encounter.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40721508What 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.