Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Rational AI: A comparison of human and AI responses to triggers of economic irrationality in poker

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2111.07295 v1 pith:HJCFKNSH submitted 2021-11-14 econ.TH econ.EM

classification econ.THecon.EM
keywords pluribuseconomichumanhumansdecision-makingexhibitirrationalpatterns
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Humans exhibit irrational decision-making patterns in response to environmental triggers, such as experiencing an economic loss or gain. In this paper we investigate whether algorithms exhibit the same behavior by examining the observed decisions and latent risk and rationality parameters estimated by a random utility model with constant relative risk-aversion utility function. We use a dataset consisting of 10,000 hands of poker played by Pluribus, the first algorithm in the world to beat professional human players and find (1) Pluribus does shift its playing style in response to economic losses and gains, ceteris paribus; (2) Pluribus becomes more risk-averse and rational following a trigger but the humans become more risk-seeking and irrational; (3) the difference in playing styles between Pluribus and the humans on the dimensions of risk-aversion and rationality are particularly differentiable when both have experienced a trigger. This provides support that decision-making patterns could be used as "behavioral signatures" to identify human versus algorithmic decision-makers in unlabeled contexts.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Pith tools