mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Economic Rationality under Specialization: Evidence of Decision Bias in AI Agents

arXiv 2501.18190 ↗First posted 30 Jan 2025cs.AIcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

In the study by Chen et al. (2023) [01], the large language model GPT demonstrated economic rationality comparable to or exceeding the average human level in tasks such as budget allocation and risk preference. Building on this finding, this paper further incorporates specialized agents, such as biotechnology experts and economists, for a horizontal comparison to explore whether specialization can enhance or maintain economic rationality equivalent to that of GPT in similar decision-making scenarios. The results indicate that when agents invest more effort in specialized fields, their decision-making behavior is more prone to 'rationality shift,' specifically manifested as increased violations of GARP (Generalized Axiom of Revealed Preference), decreased CCEI (Critical Cost Efficiency Index), and more significant decision deviations under high-risk conditions. In contrast, GPT and more generalized basic agents maintain a more stable and consistent level of rationality across multiple tasks. This study reveals the inherent conflict between specialization and economic rationality, providing new insights for constructing AI decision-making systems that balance specialization and generalization across various scenarios.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 30 Jan 2025.

Builds on

0 of 0 references.

No references here yet.

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2024Heuristics and Biases in AI Decision-Making: Implications for Responsible AGI
  2. 2024STEER: Assessing the Economic Rationality of Large Language Models
  3. 2025Aligning Large Language Model Agents with Rational and Moral Preferences: A Supervised Fine-Tuning Approach
  4. 2026Sparks of Rationality: Do Reasoning LLMs Align with Human Judgment and Choice?
  5. 2025EconEvals: Benchmarks and Litmus Tests for Economic Decision-Making by LLM Agents
  6. 2026Language Models Exhibit Inconsistent Biases Towards Algorithmic Agents and Human Experts
  7. 2025Evaluating and Aligning Human Economic Risk Preferences in LLMs
  8. 2022Using cognitive psychology to understand GPT-3