arXiv preprint ·
The psychophysics of affect in large language models
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
Good decisions often require considering how outcomes will feel. Yet large language models (LLMs) increasingly enter decision workflows, despite little being known about how they map outcomes to feelings or use those mappings in choice. We tested how LLMs anticipated gambling or stock-trading outcomes would feel and whether they incorporated these ratings into choice. When outcomes were rated in isolation, ratings exhibited diminishing sensitivity to magnitude, resembling human value functions; but models rated gains more intensely than equivalent losses, an inversion of canonical loss aversion we call silicon gain amplification. When outcomes were rated together, enabling direct comparison, ratings linearised. In choice, the gain-loss asymmetry largely disappeared, and models' own ratings did not reliably explain their choices better than monetary utility did. These findings reveal malleable mappings from outcomes to affect, raising questions about whether and how agentic LLMs should incorporate anticipated feelings into decisions.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Artificial Intelligence
HALO: Human-Grounded Granular Evaluation of Proactive Agents
MUON-RT Reusing the Teacher's Trajectory for Momentum-Free Muon for LLM Self-Distillation
A Novel Approach to Evaluating Evaluation Metrics for Multi-Output Structured Prediction
Language Models Show a "Women-Are-Wonderful" Effect in Blame Attribution That is Not Just Leniency
Reading-Level Verification of Kanji Words in Japanese Financial Speech Synthesis
Get the few papers worth your time in Artificial Intelligence every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.