Pith. sign in

REVIEW 7 cited by

Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is: Evaluating Strategic Planning and Execution of LLM Agents in an Auction Arena

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 2310.05746 v4 pith:Q5X4J42X submitted 2023-10-09 cs.CL cs.AI

classification cs.CLcs.AI
keywords llmsplanningskillsadvancementsagentsauctioncompetitiveevaluating
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Recent advancements in Large Language Models (LLMs) showcase advanced reasoning, yet NLP evaluations often depend on static benchmarks. Evaluating this necessitates environments that test strategic reasoning in dynamic, competitive scenarios requiring long-term planning. We introduce AucArena, a novel evaluation suite that simulates auctions, a setting chosen for being highly unpredictable and involving many skills related to resource and risk management, while also being easy to evaluate. We conduct controlled experiments using state-of-the-art LLMs to power bidding agents to benchmark their planning and execution skills. Our research demonstrates that LLMs, such as GPT-4, possess key skills for auction participation, such as budget management and goal adherence, which improve with adaptive strategies. This highlights LLMs' potential in modeling complex social interactions in competitive contexts. However, variability in LLM performance and occasional outperformance by simpler methods indicate opportunities for further advancements in LLM design and the value of our simulation environment for ongoing testing and refinement.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 7 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Can LLM Agents Price Competitively? A Dynamic Multi-Attribute Auction Benchmark for Agentic Commerce

    cs.AI 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    LLM merchant agents in a new dynamic auction benchmark capture at most 32% of hindsight-optimal profit; profit tracks margin per win more than win rate, and fast pre-shock learners adapt poorly to preference shocks.

  2. Chain-of-Models: Cross-Model Auditing for Bias-Robust LLM Judges

    cs.CL 2026-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Per-bias selection of a cross-family LLM auditor lifts biased-judgment accuracy from 0.805/0.824 baselines to 0.884.

  3. Simulating Human-Like Learning Dynamics with LLM-Empowered Agents

    cs.AI 2025-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    An LLM multi-agent simulation of a year-long classroom shows that a persona-free base LLM defaults to a 'diligent but brittle surface learner' profile, industrious but lacking deep understanding.

  4. Position Auctions in AI-Generated Content

    cs.GT 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    New mechanism-design results for position auctions with context-dependent click-through rates under multinomial logit and cascade user models, with exact optimality in the MNL case and an O(log m) approximation in the...

  5. AI Agent Behavioral Science

    q-bio.NC 2025-06 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    AI agents should be studied as behavioral entities shaped by context and interaction, not only as trained models.

  6. Can Compressed LLMs Truly Act? An Empirical Evaluation of Agentic Capabilities in LLM Compression

    cs.LG 2025-05 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    ACBench tests compressed LLMs on agentic tasks and finds 4-bit quantization keeps tool use and workflow generation strong while hurting real-world application performance.

  7. Large Language Models for Planning: A Comprehensive and Systematic Survey

    cs.AI 2025-05 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

    A structured survey of LLM planning methods, benchmarks, and interpretability work, organized around a three-way taxonomy.

Pith tools