Personalized Decision Modeling: Utility Optimization or Textualized-Symbolic Reasoning
On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation
Abstract (arXiv)
Decision-making models for individuals, particularly in high-stakes scenarios like vaccine uptake, often diverge from population optimal predictions. This gap arises from the uniqueness of the individual decision-making process, shaped by numerical attributes (e.g., cost, time) and linguistic influences (e.g., personal preferences and constraints). Developing upon Utility Theory and leveraging the textual-reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs), this paper proposes an Adaptive Textual-symbolic Human-centric Reasoning framework (ATHENA) to address the optimal information integration. ATHENA uniquely integrates two stages: First, it discovers robust, group-level symbolic utility functions via LLM-augmented symbolic discovery; Second, it implements individual-level semantic adaptation, creating personalized semantic templates guided by the optimal utility to model personalized choices. Validated on real-world travel mode and vaccine choice tasks, ATHENA consistently outperforms utility-based, machine learning, and other LLM-based models, lifting F1 score by at least 6.5% over the strongest cutting-edge models. Further, ablation studies confirm that both stages of ATHENA are critical and complementary, as removing either clearly degrades overall predictive performance. By organically integrating symbolic utility modeling and semantic adaptation, ATHENA provides a new scheme for modeling human-centric decisions. The project page can be found at https://yibozh.github.io/Athena.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 19 of its 130 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 Nov 2025.
Builds on
19 of 130 references.
Closest ancestors · 1
Same direction, newest first
Other references · 18
- 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,396
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
- 2025DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learningcited by 6,330
- 2022Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Modelscited by 5,708
- 2017Outrageously Large Neural Networks: The Sparsely-Gated Mixture-of-Experts Layercited by 3,509
- 2024Gemini 1.5: Unlocking multimodal understanding across millions of tokens of contextcited by 3,224
- 2023Tree of Thoughts: Deliberate Problem Solving with Large Language Modelscited by 3,211
- 2023Mistral 7Bcited by 3,164
- 2023Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Large Language Models: A Surveycited by 2,212
- 2024Mixtral of Expertscited by 1,823
- 2023Gemini: A Family of Highly Capable Multimodal Modelscited by 872
6 more
- 2023Instruction Tuning with GPT-4cited by 686
- 2023Instruction Tuning for Large Language Models: A Surveycited by 623
- 2024Self-Debiasing Large Language Models: Zero-Shot Recognition and Reduction of Stereotypescited by 59
- 2024Beyond Chain-of-Thought: A Survey of Chain-of-X Paradigms for LLMscited by 48
- 2024EffiVED:Efficient Video Editing via Text-instruction Diffusion Modelscited by 21
- 2023Large Language Models for Travel Behavior Predictioncited by 13
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.
2 papers.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025Classical AI vs. LLMs for Decision-Maker Alignment in Health Insurance Choices
- 2024Optimizing Alignment with Less: Leveraging Data Augmentation for Personalized Evaluation
- 2024DeLLMa: Decision Making Under Uncertainty with Large Language Models
- 2025Can Large Language Models Capture Human Risk Preferences? A Cross-Cultural Study
- 2025Rethinking Human Preference Evaluation of LLM Rationales
- 2025Alleviating Choice Supportive Bias in LLM with Reasoning Dependency Generation
- 2025DecisionFlow: Advancing Large Language Model as Principled Decision Maker
- 2025Measuring Reasoning Utility in LLMs via Conditional Entropy Reduction