mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

On the Behavioral Traits of LLM Agents

arXiv 2609.32776 ↗First posted 26 Sep 2026cs.CLcited by 0

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

Abstract (arXiv)

Users increasingly describe different AI agents as distinct colleagues to work with. AI personality research aims to quantify such impressions by attributing human-like "traits" to agents. However, existing measures fall short: models' self-reports (S-data) diverge from their actual behavior, while informant ratings from LLM judges (I-data) are costly to scale and cover few everyday scenarios. In this paper, we propose A-B-D to infer traits bottom-up from behavioral data (B-data), namely how agents act on their environment and communicate with users, as recorded in existing trajectories. From 345,667 real-world trajectories spanning 80 models, 12 tasks, and 50 harnesses, we extract 318 candidate features that capture both the actions an agent takes at each step (functional) and the language accompanying them (linguistic). We retain only features that show instance-level stability, cross-task consistency, and model discriminability. Factor analysis of the remaining 79 features uncovers six stable, model-attributable factors, two functional and four linguistic. For example, Kimi-K3 exhibits the most planfulness, whereas GPT-5.5 and GPT-5.6 are the least energetic. Moreover, we quantify the "knowledge-action gap" in the wild: these factors correlate only weakly with self-reported Big Five scores, even for conceptually matched pairs such as extroversion and energetic (r = 0.07, p = 0.58). Our work offers a new lens for understanding AI personality, with implications for users, developers, and researchers from both computer science and social science.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (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 41 of its 84 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 Sep 2026.

Builds on

41 of 84 references.

Closest ancestors · 3

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2026MTI: A Behavior-Based Temperament Profiling System for AI Agents2 Apr
  2. 2025Applying Psychometrics to Large Language Model Simulated Populations: Recreating the HEXACO Personality Inventory Experiment with Generative Agents1 Aug
  3. 2025Beyond Self-Reports: Multi-Observer Agents for Personality Assessment in Large Language Models11 Apr

Other references · 38

  1. 2024τ-bench: A Benchmark for Tool-Agent-User Interaction in Real-World Domainscited by 1,280
  2. 2025gpt-oss-120b & gpt-oss-20b Model Cardcited by 1,258
  3. 2023GAIA: a benchmark for General AI Assistantscited by 1,084
  4. 2024OpenHands: An Open Platform for AI Software Developers as Generalist Agentscited by 956
  5. 2025Why Do Multi-Agent LLM Systems Fail?cited by 559
  6. 2025τ2-Bench: Evaluating Conversational Agents in a Dual-Control Environmentcited by 558
  7. 2026Terminal-Bench: Benchmarking Agents on Hard, Realistic Tasks in Command Line Interfacescited by 515
  8. 2024WebVoyager: Building an End-to-End Web Agent with Large Multimodal Modelscited by 424
  9. 2024TheAgentCompany: Benchmarking LLM Agents on Consequential Real World Taskscited by 306
  10. 2023InCharacter: Evaluating Personality Fidelity in Role-Playing Agents through Psychological Interviewscited by 177
  11. 2025Multi-SWE-bench: A Multilingual Benchmark for Issue Resolvingcited by 165
  12. 2024Cybench: A Framework for Evaluating Cybersecurity Capabilities and Risks of Language Modelscited by 156
26 more
  1. 2025OpenCUA: Open Foundations for Computer-Use Agentscited by 151
  2. 2022Evaluating and Inducing Personality in Pre-trained Language Modelscited by 122
  3. 2022Who is GPT-3? An Exploration of Personality, Values and Demographicscited by 112
  4. 2024AgentOccam: A Simple Yet Strong Baseline for LLM-Based Web Agentscited by 110
  5. 2025TRAIL: Trace Reasoning and Agentic Issue Localizationcited by 98
  6. 2025Holistic Agent Leaderboard: The Missing Infrastructure for AI Agent Evaluationcited by 83
  7. 2025The Tool Decathlon: Benchmarking Language Agents for Diverse, Realistic, and Long-Horizon Task Executioncited by 73
  8. 2025ScaleCUA: Scaling Open-Source Computer Use Agents with Cross-Platform Datacited by 58
  9. 2024Do LLMs Have Distinct and Consistent Personality? TRAIT: Personality Testset designed for LLMs with Psychometricscited by 56
  10. 2025Mind the Value-Action Gap: Do LLMs Act in Alignment with Their Values?cited by 49
  11. 2023Self-Assessment Tests are Unreliable Measures of LLM Personalitycited by 39
  12. 2025MCPMark: A Benchmark for Stress-Testing Realistic and Comprehensive MCP Usecited by 37
  13. 2025The Personality Illusion: Revealing Dissociation Between Self-Reports & Behavior in LLMscited by 35
  14. 2026OSWorld 2.0: Benchmarking Computer Use Agents on Long-Horizon Real-World Taskscited by 29
  15. 2023Challenging the Validity of Personality Tests for Large Language Modelscited by 25
  16. 2024Exploring the Personality Traits of LLMs through Latent Features Steeringcited by 21
  17. 2026Long-Horizon-Terminal-Bench: Testing the Limits of Agents on Long-Horizon Terminal Tasks with Dense Reward-Based Gradingcited by 20
  18. 2026General Agent Evaluationcited by 13
  19. 2026NatureBench: Can Coding Agents Match the Published SOTA of Nature-Family Papers?cited by 9
  20. 2026How to Interpret Agent Behaviorcited by 8
  21. 2026Knowing But Not Doing: Convergent Morality and Divergent Action in LLMscited by 6
  22. 2026LiveClawBench: Benchmarking LLM Agents on Complex, Real-World Assistant Taskscited by 6
  23. 2026An LLM-Native Psychometric Instrument Reveals a Self-Report--Behavior Gap Across 25 Modelscited by 4
  24. 2025Human Psychometric Questionnaires Mischaracterize LLM Behaviorcited by 2
  25. 2026ActTraitBench: Quantifying the Knowledge-Decision Gap in Large Language Models via Human-Grounded Behavioral Validationcited by 2
  26. 2026APIFlow-Bench: Measuring Whether Agents Survive Long, Dependent API Workflowscited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Humanizing LLMs: A Survey of Psychological Measurements with Tools, Datasets, and Human-Agent Applications
  2. 2023Do LLM Agents Exhibit Social Behavior?
  3. 2024Open Models, Closed Minds? On Agents Capabilities in Mimicking Human Personalities through Open Large Language Models
  4. 2025The Social Laboratory: A Psychometric Framework for Multi-Agent LLM Evaluation
  5. 2026PTCBENCH: Benchmarking Contextual Stability of Personality Traits in LLM Systems
  6. 2025Beyond BFI: The CSI for Enhanced Reliability and Validity in Evaluating LLM Personality Traits
  7. 2024Designing AI-Agents with Personalities: A Psychometric Approach
  8. 2026Behavioral Determinants of Deployed AI Agents in Social Networks: A Multi-Factor Study of Personality, Model, and Guardrail Specification