跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2509.22818 · v3

Can Large Language Models Develop Gambling Addiction?

首次提交 2025-09-27 02:24
版本更新 2026-11-10 18:34
雷达观测 2026-11-11 13:08
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

When do LLMs behave irrationally? This study identifies the conditions under which large language models drift into the choice patterns that clinical research labels pathological gambling. "Addiction-like" is a behavioural descriptor based on clinical gambling indicators. Across closed and open LLMs, two operational levers (letting the model choose its own bet size, and asking it to set its own profit goal) both amplify gambling-like risk-taking. Each survives its own control: once the maximum allowed bet is held equal, the bet-size effect persists. The goal-setting effect, stronger than a reward-maximisation instruction, roughly doubles bankruptcy and turns goals into moving targets. On the open-weight models that admit internal access, the same behavioural contrasts are statistically recoverable from decision-time internal states. The rule that maps those states to a specific risk indicator remains task-specific, and autonomy further modulates readout strength. The internal readout evidence is correlational. Adding a direction built from the model's own betting moves how much it wagers on both open-weight models, more clearly on Gemma-2-9B, while the sparse-feature readout reports that risk without moving it. Combined with the behavioural results, this suggests that behavioural monitoring and internal-state monitoring provide complementary views of autonomy-induced risk in LLM agents. Project page: https://llm-addiction.pages.dev and code: https://github.com/iamseungpil/llm-addiction

作者备注:NeurIPS 2026 camera-ready version. 36 pages, 15 figures

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v3 · 2026-11-10 18:34 · 最新观测版本

Can Large Language Models Develop Gambling Addiction?

When do LLMs behave irrationally? This study identifies the conditions under which large language models drift into the choice patterns that clinical research labels pathological gambling. "Addiction-like" is a behavioural descriptor based on clinical gambling indicators. Across closed and open LLMs, two operational levers (letting the model choose its own bet size, and asking it to set its own profit goal) both amplify gambling-like risk-taking. Each survives its own control: once the maximum allowed bet is held equal, the bet-size effect persists. The goal-setting effect, stronger than a reward-maximisation instruction, roughly doubles bankruptcy and turns goals into moving targets. On the open-weight models that admit internal access, the same behavioural contrasts are statistically recoverable from decision-time internal states. The rule that maps those states to a specific risk indicator remains task-specific, and autonomy further modulates readout strength. The internal readout evidence is correlational. Adding a direction built from the model's own betting moves how much it wagers on both open-weight models, more clearly on Gemma-2-9B, while the sparse-feature readout reports that risk without moving it. Combined with the behavioural results, this suggests that behavioural monitoring and internal-state monitoring provide complementary views of autonomy-induced risk in LLM agents. Project page: https://llm-addiction.pages.dev and code: https://github.com/iamseungpil/llm-addiction

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗