Measuring Behavior Portability in Large Language Models
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Large language models are increasingly deployed as autonomous decision makers, yet the behavioral mapping they exhibit can vary substantially across decision environments that are payoff-equivalent by construction-environments that share identical payoff-relevant structure but differ in surface presentation. This sensitivity renders suite-based evaluation fragile and raises a fundamental question of behavioral portability: how well does a behavioral mapping learned in one decision environment informative on another that preserves the same underlying incentive structure? We introduce a formal framework to measure this property. Our protocol fits an interpretable behavioral model on data pooled from a set of source environments and evaluates its out-of-sample predictive performance in a held-out target environment, benchmarking against an oracle trained directly on target data. Portability is quantified via a loss-agnostic measure that delivers worst-case bounds on the performance of the induced prediction-action mapping in the target environment. In controlled experiments spanning seven canonical economic decision problems, we document substantial and systematic portability losses, suggesting that behavioral characterizations of LLMs obtained in one decision environment cannot be assumed to transfer reliably to structurally equivalent alternatives.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 34 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 22 Jun 2026.
Builds on
19 of 34 references.
References · 19
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
- 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,459
- 2025DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learningcited by 6,330
- 2019Invariant Risk Minimizationcited by 1,854
- 2020Beyond Accuracy: Behavioral Testing of NLP models with CheckListcited by 1,006
- 2015Causal inference using invariant prediction: identification and confidence intervalscited by 536
- 2022Using Large Language Models to Simulate Multiple Humans and Replicate Human Subject Studiescited by 515
- 2023State of What Art? A Call for Multi-Prompt LLM Evaluationcited by 310
- 2023Playing repeated games with Large Language Modelscited by 217
- 2024ProSA: Assessing and Understanding the Prompt Sensitivity of LLMscited by 149
- 2021Robustness Gym: Unifying the NLP Evaluation Landscapecited by 108
- 2018Incomplete Contracting and AI Alignmentcited by 62
7 more
- 2024POSIX: A Prompt Sensitivity Index For Large Language Modelscited by 59
- 2023Strategic Behavior of Large Language Models: Game Structure vs. Contextual Framingcited by 51
- 2023PromptBench: A Unified Library for Evaluation of Large Language Modelscited by 44
- 2024On the Worst Prompt Performance of Large Language Modelscited by 38
- 2023ASSERT: Automated Safety Scenario Red Teaming for Evaluating the Robustness of Large Language Modelscited by 12
- 2025Using Large Language Models to Categorize Strategic Situations and Decipher Motivations Behind Human Behaviorscited by 5
- 2025Are All Prompt Components Value-Neutral? Understanding the Heterogeneous Adversarial Robustness of Dissected Prompt in Large Language Modelscited by 3
Built on by
Not cited yet.