An analysis of AI Decision under Risk: Prospect theory emerges in Large Language Models
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Judgment of risk is key to decision-making under uncertainty. As Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky famously discovered, humans do so in a distinctive way that departs from mathematical rationalism. Specifically, they demonstrated experimentally that humans accept more risk when they feel themselves at risk of losing something than when they might gain. I report the first tests of Kahneman and Tversky's landmark 'prospect theory' with Large Language Models, including today's state of the art chain-of-thought 'reasoners'. In common with humans, I find that prospect theory often anticipates how these models approach risky decisions across a range of scenarios. I also demonstrate that context is key to explaining much of the variance in risk appetite. The 'frame' through which risk is apprehended appears to be embedded within the language of the scenarios tackled by the models. Specifically, I find that military scenarios generate far larger 'framing effects' than do civilian settings, ceteris paribus. My research suggests, therefore, that language models the world, capturing our human heuristics and biases. But also that these biases are uneven - the idea of a 'frame' is richer than simple gains and losses. Wittgenstein's notion of 'language games' explains the contingent, localised biases activated by these scenarios. Finally, I use my findings to reframe the ongoing debate about reasoning and memorisation in LLMs.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 0 of its 11 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 Jul 2025.
Builds on
0 of 11 references.
No references here yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 3.
4 papers.
- 2026AI Arms and Influence: Frontier Models Exhibit Sophisticated Reasoning in Simulated Nuclear Crisescited by 7
- 2025Rethinking Prospect Theory for LLMs: Revealing the Instability of Decision-Making under Epistemic Uncertaintycited by 4
- 2026Beyond Rational Illusion: Behaviorally Realistic Strategic Classificationcited by 1
- 2026Instrument Effects in Language-Model Honesty Evaluation: An Auditable Single-System Demonstrationcited by 1
- 2026Instrument Effects in Language-Model Honesty Evaluation: An Auditable Single-System Demonstration15 Jul 2026
- 2026Beyond Rational Illusion: Behaviorally Realistic Strategic Classification19 May 2026
- 2026AI Arms and Influence: Frontier Models Exhibit Sophisticated Reasoning in Simulated Nuclear Crises16 Feb 2026
- 2025Rethinking Prospect Theory for LLMs: Revealing the Instability of Decision-Making under Epistemic Uncertainty12 Aug 2025
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Mind the (DH) Gap! A Contrast in Risky Choices Between Reasoning and Conversational LLMs
- 2026Probing Outcome-Level Resemblance and Mechanism-Level Alignment in LLM Risk Decisions: Evidence from the St. Petersburg Game
- 2025Can Large Language Models Capture Human Risk Preferences? A Cross-Cultural Study
- 2025Evaluating and Aligning Human Economic Risk Preferences in LLMs
- 2024The Reasoning Under Uncertainty Trap: A Structural AI Risk
- 2026Language models judge war differently when tested for alignment
- 2026Language Models Exhibit Inconsistent Biases Towards Algorithmic Agents and Human Experts
- 2026The Internal Anatomy of Strategic Choice in Large Language Models