# Are Large Language Models Aligned with People's Social Intuitions for Human-Robot Interactions?

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.05701 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.05701/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 21 of its 37 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 8 Mar 2024.

## Builds on (most cited first, 21 of 21)

- [GPT-4 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.08774/) (2023)
- [Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.02155/) (2022)
- [Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.09288/) (2023)
- [Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.11903/) (2022)
- [Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasoners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.11916/) (2022)
- [RT-2: Vision-Language-Action Models Transfer Web Knowledge to Robotic Control](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.15818/) (2023)
- [Do As I Can, Not As I Say: Grounding Language in Robotic Affordances](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.01691/) (2022)
- [Using Large Language Models to Simulate Multiple Humans and Replicate Human Subject Studies](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2208.10264/) (2022)
- [Artificial Intelligence, Values and Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2001.09768/) (2020)
- [Language models show human-like content effects on reasoning tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2207.07051/) (2022)
- [Thinking Fast and Slow in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.05206/) (2022)
- [The Goldilocks of Pragmatic Understanding: Fine-Tuning Strategy Matters for Implicature Resolution by LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.14986/) (2022)
- [Theory of Mind in Large Language Models: Examining Performance of 11 State-of-the-Art models vs. Children Aged 7-10 on Advanced Tests](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.20320/) (2023)
- [Understanding Large-Language Model (LLM)-powered Human-Robot Interaction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.03217/) (2024)
- [When do you need Chain-of-Thought Prompting for ChatGPT?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.03262/) (2023)
- [Towards A Holistic Landscape of Situated Theory of Mind in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.19619/) (2023)
- [Large Language Models as Zero-Shot Human Models for Human-Robot Interaction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.03548/) (2023)
- [Theory of Mind abilities of Large Language Models in Human-Robot Interaction : An Illusion?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.05302/) (2024)
- [Language Models are Bounded Pragmatic Speakers: Understanding RLHF from a Bayesian Cognitive Modeling Perspective](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.17760/) (2023)
- [Large Language Models for Psycholinguistic Plausibility Pretesting](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.05455/) (2024)
- [Exploring Spatial Schema Intuitions in Large Language and Vision Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.00956/) (2024)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in robotics, especially for high-level action planning. Meanwhile, many robotics applications involve human supervisors or collaborators. Hence, it is crucial for LLMs to generate socially acceptable actions that align with people's preferences and values. In this work, we test whether LLMs capture people's intuitions about behavior judgments and communication preferences in human-robot interaction (HRI) scenarios. For evaluation, we reproduce three HRI user studies, comparing the output of LLMs with that of real participants. We find that GPT-4 strongly outperforms other models, generating answers that correlate strongly with users' answers in two studies unicodex2014 the first study dealing with selecting the most appropriate communicative act for a robot in various situations (rs = 0.82), and the second with judging the desirability, intentionality, and surprisingness of behavior (rs = 0.83). However, for the last study, testing whether people judge the behavior of robots and humans differently, no model achieves strong correlations. Moreover, we show that vision models fail to capture the essence of video stimuli and that LLMs tend to rate different communicative acts and behavior desirability higher than people.