A formal framework of 'verdict games' models conversational interaction with a non-strategic judge; the paper frames the Turing test as such a game and reports an LLM simulation where strategic prosecutors win 64% vs 27% for naive ones.
Title resolution pending
1 Pith paper cite this work. Polarity classification is still indexing.
1
Pith paper citing it
citation-role summary
background 1
citation-polarity summary
fields
cs.AI 1years
2025 1verdicts
CONDITIONAL 1roles
background 1polarities
unclear 1representative citing papers
citing papers explorer
-
Conversation Games and a Strategic View of the Turing Test
A formal framework of 'verdict games' models conversational interaction with a non-strategic judge; the paper frames the Turing test as such a game and reports an LLM simulation where strategic prosecutors win 64% vs 27% for naive ones.