mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

AIM-Bench: Evaluating Decision-making Biases of Agentic LLM as Inventory Manager

arXiv 2508.11416 ↗First posted 15 Aug 2025cs.AIcited by 6

On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning for agents, planning and code

also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)

Recent advances in mathematical reasoning and the long-term planning capabilities of large language models (LLMs) have precipitated the development of agents, which are being increasingly leveraged in business operations processes. Decision models to optimize inventory levels are one of the core elements of operations management. However, the capabilities of the LLM agent in making inventory decisions in uncertain contexts, as well as the decision-making biases (e.g. framing effect, etc.) of the agent, remain largely unexplored. This prompts concerns regarding the capacity of LLM agents to effectively address real-world problems, as well as the potential implications of biases that may be present. To address this gap, we introduce AIM-Bench, a novel benchmark designed to assess the decision-making behaviour of LLM agents in uncertain supply chain management scenarios through a diverse series of inventory replenishment experiments. Our results reveal that different LLMs typically exhibit varying degrees of decision bias that are similar to those observed in human beings. In addition, we explored strategies to mitigate the pull-to-centre effect and the bullwhip effect, namely cognitive reflection and implementation of information sharing. These findings underscore the need for careful consideration of the potential biases in deploying LLMs in Inventory decision-making scenarios. We hope that these insights will pave the way for mitigating human decision bias and developing human-centred decision support systems for supply chains.

Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning for agents, planning and code, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 9 of its 38 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 Aug 2025.

Builds on

9 of 38 references.

References · 9

  1. 2025Gemini 2.5: Pushing the Frontier with Advanced Reasoning, Multimodality, Long Context, and Next Generation Agentic Capabilitiescited by 3,796
  2. 2024Large language models that replace human participants can harmfully misportray and flatten identity groupscited by 144
  3. 2025ArtifactsBench: Bridging the Visual-Interactive Gap in LLM Code Generation Evaluationcited by 42
  4. 2024Decision-Making Behavior Evaluation Framework for LLMs under Uncertain Contextcited by 41
  5. 2025MV-MATH: Evaluating Multimodal Math Reasoning in Multi-Visual Contextscited by 32
  6. 2024UrBench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Evaluating Large Multimodal Models in Multi-View Urban Scenarioscited by 28
  7. 2025PokerBench: Training Large Language Models to become Professional Poker Playerscited by 18
  8. 2024Uncovering LLM-Generated Code: A Zero-Shot Synthetic Code Detector via Code Rewritingcited by 11
  9. 2024Expand VSR Benchmark for VLLM to Expertize in Spatial Rulescited by 3

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 6.

6 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026AI Agents for Inventory Control: Human-LLM-OR Complementarity
  2. 2026Dynamics of Cognitive Heterogeneity: Investigating Behavioral Biases in Multi-Stage Supply Chains with LLM-Based Simulation
  3. 2026AI Agent Systems for Supply Chains: Structured Decision Prompts and Memory Retrieval
  4. 2024Agentic LLMs in the Supply Chain: Towards Autonomous Multi-Agent Consensus-Seeking
  5. 2025Ask, Clarify, Optimize: Human-LLM Agent Collaboration for Smarter Inventory Control
  6. 2025Predicting Effects, Missing Distributions: Evaluating LLMs as Human Behavior Simulators in Operations Management
  7. 2025Noise, Adaptation, and Strategy: Assessing LLM Fidelity in Decision-Making
  8. 2024InvAgent: A Large Language Model based Multi-Agent System for Inventory Management in Supply Chains