mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Understanding LLM Agent Behaviours via Game Theory: Strategy Recognition, Biases and Multi-Agent Dynamics

arXiv 2512.07462 ↗First posted 8 Dec 2025cs.MA cs.AI cs.GTcited by 11

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Social simulation and multi-agent debate

Abstract (arXiv)

As Large Language Models (LLMs) increasingly operate as autonomous decision-makers in interactive and multi-agent systems and human societies, understanding their strategic behaviour has profound implications for safety, coordination, and the design of AI-driven social and economic infrastructures. Assessing such behaviour requires methods that capture not only what LLMs output, but the underlying intentions that guide their decisions. In this work, we extend the FAIRGAME framework to systematically evaluate LLM behaviour in repeated social dilemmas through two complementary advances: a payoff-scaled Prisoners Dilemma isolating sensitivity to incentive magnitude, and an integrated multi-agent Public Goods Game with dynamic payoffs and multi-agent histories. These environments reveal consistent behavioural signatures across models and languages, including incentive-sensitive cooperation, cross-linguistic divergence and end-game alignment toward defection. To interpret these patterns, we train traditional supervised classification models on canonical repeated-game strategies and apply them to FAIRGAME trajectories, showing that LLMs exhibit systematic, model- and language-dependent behavioural intentions, with linguistic framing at times exerting effects as strong as architectural differences. Together, these findings provide a unified methodological foundation for auditing LLMs as strategic agents and reveal systematic cooperation biases with direct implications for AI governance, collective decision-making, and the design of safe multi-agent systems.

Key facts. Cited by 11 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Social simulation and multi-agent debate, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 12 of its 34 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Dec 2025.

Builds on

12 of 34 references.

Closest ancestors · 3

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025Strategic Communication and Language Bias in Multi-Agent LLM Coordination30 Jul
  2. 2025FAIRGAME: a Framework for AI Agents Bias Recognition using Game Theory19 Apr
  3. 2025Do LLMs trust AI regulation? Emerging behaviour of game-theoretic LLM agents11 Apr

Other references · 9

  1. 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,302
  2. 2023A Multitask, Multilingual, Multimodal Evaluation of ChatGPT on Reasoning, Hallucination, and Interactivitycited by 888
  3. 2023Playing repeated games with Large Language Modelscited by 213
  4. 2025Multi-Agent Risks from Advanced AIcited by 150
  5. 2020When to (or not to) trust intelligent machines: Insights from an evolutionary game theory analysis of trust in repeated gamescited by 14
  6. 2025Media and responsible AI governance: a game-theoretic and LLM analysiscited by 11
  7. 2022Inferring Strategies from Observations in Long Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma Experimentscited by 6
  8. 2025Can Media Act as a Soft Regulator of Safe AI Development? A Game Theoretical Analysiscited by 3
  9. 2025Can LLMs effectively provide game-theoretic-based scenarios for cybersecurity?cited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 11.

11 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Payoff scaling shapes cooperation in LLM agents across languages
  2. 2026Evaluating Collective Behaviour of Hundreds of LLM Agents
  3. 2025Corrupted by Reasoning: Reasoning Language Models Become Free-Riders in Public Goods Games
  4. 2025Playing games with Large language models: Randomness and strategy
  5. 2025Will Systems of LLM Agents Cooperate: An Investigation into a Social Dilemma
  6. 2026Competition and Cooperation of LLM Agents in Games
  7. 2025Emergent Social Dynamics of LLM Agents in the El Farol Bar Problem
  8. 2025Humans expect rationality and cooperation from LLM opponents in strategic games