Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Negotiating with LLMS: Prompt Hacks, Skill Gaps, and Reasoning Deficits

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 2312.03720 v2 pith:FCLADMS5 submitted 2023-11-26 cs.CL cs.AI

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

Large language models LLMs like ChatGPT have reached the 100 Mio user barrier in record time and might increasingly enter all areas of our life leading to a diverse set of interactions between those Artificial Intelligence models and humans. While many studies have discussed governance and regulations deductively from first-order principles, few studies provide an inductive, data-driven lens based on observing dialogues between humans and LLMs especially when it comes to non-collaborative, competitive situations that have the potential to pose a serious threat to people. In this work, we conduct a user study engaging over 40 individuals across all age groups in price negotiations with an LLM. We explore how people interact with an LLM, investigating differences in negotiation outcomes and strategies. Furthermore, we highlight shortcomings of LLMs with respect to their reasoning capabilities and, in turn, susceptiveness to prompt hacking, which intends to manipulate the LLM to make agreements that are against its instructions or beyond any rationality. We also show that the negotiated prices humans manage to achieve span a broad range, which points to a literacy gap in effectively interacting with LLMs.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Beyond Nash Equilibrium: Bounded Rationality of LLMs and humans in Strategic Decision-making

    cs.AI 2025-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    LLMs reproduce human heuristics like switching after a loss and cooperating when future rounds loom, but apply them more rigidly and adapt less than humans.

Pith tools