Abstract:The observed similarities in the behavior of humans and Large Language Models (LLMs) have prompted researchers to consider the potential of using LLMs as models of human cognition. However, several significant challenges must be addressed before LLMs can be legitimately regarded as cognitive models. For instance, LLMs are trained on far more data than humans typically encounter, and may have been directly trained on human data in specific cognitive tasks or aligned with human preferences. Consequently, the origins of these behavioral similarities are not well understood. In this paper, we propose a novel way to enhance the utility of LLMs as cognitive models. This approach involves (i) leveraging computationally equivalent tasks that both an LLM and a rational agent need to master for solving a cognitive problem and (ii) examining the specific task distributions required for an LLM to exhibit human-like behaviors. We apply this approach to decision-making -- specifically risky and intertemporal choice -- where the key computationally equivalent task is the arithmetic of expected value calculations. We show that an LLM pretrained on an ecologically valid arithmetic dataset, which we call Arithmetic-GPT, predicts human behavior better than many traditional cognitive models. Pretraining LLMs on ecologically valid arithmetic datasets is sufficient to produce a strong correspondence between these models and human decision-making. Our results also suggest that LLMs used as cognitive models should be carefully investigated via ablation studies of the pretraining data.

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

### Problems the paper attempts to solve This paper attempts to explore whether large - language models (LLMs) can be effective tools as human cognitive models, especially in decision - making, such as risky choice and intertemporal choice. Specifically, the paper focuses on the following points: 1. **Sources of behavioral similarity**: Although existing research has found that LLMs' performance in some cognitive tasks is similar to that of humans, the origin of these similarities is still unclear. For example, LLMs may be the result of training on a large amount of data, which is far more than the amount of data that humans usually encounter, or they may be directly trained on human data in specific cognitive tasks, or aligned with human preferences. 2. **Improving the utility of LLMs as cognitive models**: The author proposes a new method to enhance the utility of LLMs as cognitive models. This method includes: - **Utilizing computationally equivalent tasks**: That is, the computational tasks that both LLMs and rational agents need to master to solve cognitive problems. In this paper, the key computationally equivalent task is expected value calculations. - **Examining task distributions**: That is, the task distributions in which LLMs need to show human behavior. 3. **Verifying hypotheses**: By generating a synthetic dataset containing expected value calculations and training a small - language model (called Arithmetic - GPT), the author tests the following hypothesis: if LLMs are pre - trained on an ecologically valid expected value calculation dataset, can they better predict human behavior? ### Main contributions - **Data generation algorithm**: The author defines a data generation algorithm for generating synthetic datasets, thus fully controlling the training data of LLMs, solving the data gap and contamination problems. - **Model evaluation**: By extracting the embeddings of pre - trained models and using these embeddings to predict human choices, the author evaluates the effects of different pre - trained datasets. - **Experimental results**: The experimental results show that the Arithmetic - GPT model pre - trained with an ecologically valid dataset can better predict human choices, outperforming many traditional cognitive models. ### Formulas - **Expected Value (EV)**: \[ EV(A)=\sum_{i\in A}p_{i}\times x_{i} \] where the probability of each outcome \(i\) is \(p_{i}\), the payoff is \(x_{i}\), and \(\sum_{i}p_{i} = 1\). - **Present Value (PV)**: \[ PV(A)=\sum_{t\in A}d_{t}\times x_{t} \] where \(x_{t}\) is the value realized at time \(t\), discounted by the discount factor \(d\), reflecting the decision - maker's time - preference. - **Utility function of Cumulative Prospect Theory (CPT)**: \[ U(x)=\begin{cases} x^{\alpha}&\text{if }x\geq0\\ -\lambda x^{\beta}&\text{if }x < 0 \end{cases} \] where \(x\) represents value, the shape parameters \(\alpha\) and \(\beta\) define the curvature of the utility function, and the parameter \(\lambda\geq1\) reflects loss aversion. - **Probability weight function**: \[ w(p)=\frac{p^{\gamma}}{(p^{\gamma}+(1 - p)^{\gamma})^{1/\gamma}} \] where \(p\) is the objective probability and \(\gamma\) is the parameter controlling the curvature of the weight function. - **Hyperbolic discounting**

Language Models Trained to do Arithmetic Predict Human Risky and Intertemporal Choice

Large Language Models Assume People are More Rational than We Really are

Language Models Do Hard Arithmetic Tasks Easily and Hardly Do Easy Arithmetic Tasks

Arithmetic Without Algorithms: Language Models Solve Math With a Bag of Heuristics

Language Models are Symbolic Learners in Arithmetic

Take Caution in Using LLMs as Human Surrogates: Scylla Ex Machina

Interpreting and Improving Large Language Models in Arithmetic Calculation

Predicting and Understanding Human Action Decisions: Insights from Large Language Models and Cognitive Instance-Based Learning

Can Large Language Models Serve as Rational Players in Game Theory? A Systematic Analysis

Decision-Making Behavior Evaluation Framework for LLMs under Uncertain Context

STEER: Assessing the Economic Rationality of Large Language Models

Executing Arithmetic: Fine-Tuning Large Language Models as Turing Machines

Large Language Models: An Applied Econometric Framework

Do Large Language Models Truly Grasp Mathematics? An Empirical Exploration From Cognitive Psychology

Economics Arena for Large Language Models

Rationality Report Cards: Assessing the Economic Rationality of Large Language Models

Do Language Models Exhibit the Same Cognitive Biases in Problem Solving as Human Learners?

Explaining Large Language Models Decisions Using Shapley Values

How well do Large Language Models perform in Arithmetic tasks?

A Careful Examination of Large Language Model Performance on Grade School Arithmetic

Large Language Models for Behavioral Economics: Internal Validity and Elicitation of Mental Models