mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Relative Value Biases in Large Language Models

arXiv 2401.14530 ↗First posted 25 Jan 2024cs.CL cs.AI cs.LGcited by 6

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Studies of reinforcement learning in humans and animals have demonstrated a preference for options that yielded relatively better outcomes in the past, even when those options are associated with lower absolute reward. The present study tested whether large language models would exhibit a similar bias. We had gpt-4-1106-preview (GPT-4 Turbo) and Llama-2-70B make repeated choices between pairs of options with the goal of maximizing payoffs. A complete record of previous outcomes was included in each prompt. Both models exhibited relative value decision biases similar to those observed in humans and animals. Making relative comparisons among outcomes more explicit magnified the bias, whereas prompting the models to estimate expected outcomes caused the bias to disappear. These results have implications for the potential mechanisms that contribute to context-dependent choice in human agents.

Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 8 of its 28 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 Jan 2024.

Builds on

8 of 28 references.

References · 8

  1. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  2. 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,132
  3. 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 12,865
  4. 2022Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasonerscited by 4,323
  5. 2022Using Large Language Models to Simulate Multiple Humans and Replicate Human Subject Studiescited by 506
  6. 2022Using cognitive psychology to understand GPT-3cited by 389
  7. 2023Studying and improving reasoning in humans and machinescited by 14
  8. 2023Aspects of human memory and Large Language Modelscited by 12

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 2; 2025: 3; 2026: 1.

6 papers.