LLM Voting: Human Choices and AI Collective Decision Making

Joshua C. Yang, Damian Dailisan, Marcin Korecki, Carina I. Hausladen and Dirk Helbing

Papers from arXiv.org

Abstract: This paper investigates the voting behaviors of Large Language Models (LLMs), specifically GPT-4 and LLaMA-2, their biases, and how they align with human voting patterns. Our methodology involved using a dataset from a human voting experiment to establish a baseline for human preferences and conducting a corresponding experiment with LLM agents. We observed that the choice of voting methods and the presentation order influenced LLM voting outcomes. We found that varying the persona can reduce some of these biases and enhance alignment with human choices. While the Chain-of-Thought approach did not improve prediction accuracy, it has potential for AI explainability in the voting process. We also identified a trade-off between preference diversity and alignment accuracy in LLMs, influenced by different temperature settings. Our findings indicate that LLMs may lead to less diverse collective outcomes and biased assumptions when used in voting scenarios, emphasizing the need for cautious integration of LLMs into democratic processes.

Date: 2024-01, Revised 2024-08
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-ain, nep-big, nep-cdm, nep-cmp, nep-exp, nep-inv and nep-pol
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://arxiv.org/pdf/2402.01766 Latest version (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:arx:papers:2402.01766

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Papers from arXiv.org
Bibliographic data for series maintained by arXiv administrators ().