{"record_type":"pith_number_record","schema_url":"https://pith.science/schemas/pith-number/v1.json","pith_number":"pith:2024:ER7HQYFELB6CPRVIW77ENF75X4","short_pith_number":"pith:ER7HQYFE","schema_version":"1.0","canonical_sha256":"247e7860a4587c27c6a8b7fe4697fdbf12ca617f96231316643fec0b1a5fd266","source":{"kind":"arxiv","id":"2406.05972","version":2},"attestation_state":"computed","paper":{"title":"Decision-Making Behavior Evaluation Framework for LLMs under Uncertain Context","license":"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/","headline":"","cross_cats":["cs.CY","cs.HC","cs.LG","econ.TH"],"primary_cat":"cs.AI","authors_text":"Deming Chen, Jingru Jia, Junhao Pan, Paul E. McNamara, Zehua Yuan","submitted_at":"2024-06-10T02:14:19Z","abstract_excerpt":"When making decisions under uncertainty, individuals often deviate from rational behavior, which can be evaluated across three dimensions: risk preference, probability weighting, and loss aversion. Given the widespread use of large language models (LLMs) in decision-making processes, it is crucial to assess whether their behavior aligns with human norms and ethical expectations or exhibits potential biases. Several empirical studies have investigated the rationality and social behavior performance of LLMs, yet their internal decision-making tendencies and capabilities remain inadequately under"},"verification_status":{"content_addressed":true,"pith_receipt":true,"author_attested":false,"weak_author_claims":0,"strong_author_claims":0,"externally_anchored":false,"storage_verified":false,"citation_signatures":0,"replication_records":0,"graph_snapshot":true,"references_resolved":false,"formal_links_present":false},"canonical_record":{"source":{"id":"2406.05972","kind":"arxiv","version":2},"metadata":{"license":"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/","primary_cat":"cs.AI","submitted_at":"2024-06-10T02:14:19Z","cross_cats_sorted":["cs.CY","cs.HC","cs.LG","econ.TH"],"title_canon_sha256":"5a94749ed18d11c22efc5a71a5510550aa3fa70cda8c3d60e51a5b7867d4bee4","abstract_canon_sha256":"3efb137e4820c31c9947951fdac7980052c3b8a3a6455ac9d32c70e9e95e0b65"},"schema_version":"1.0"},"receipt":{"kind":"pith_receipt","key_id":"pith-v1-2026-05","algorithm":"ed25519","signed_at":"2026-07-05T09:29:30.255091Z","signature_b64":"8eOMo3XtFhOc+/omSnON2HcTCIBNIj3Qa/Yjx6StvcbF5yc+I9bIQb7yfGCXjf5nPXSqGqWG1tibSTppLe4ECw==","signed_message":"canonical_sha256_bytes","builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1","receipt_version":"0.3","canonical_sha256":"247e7860a4587c27c6a8b7fe4697fdbf12ca617f96231316643fec0b1a5fd266","last_reissued_at":"2026-07-05T09:29:30.254590Z","signature_status":"signed_v1","first_computed_at":"2026-07-05T09:29:30.254590Z","public_key_fingerprint":"8d4b5ee74e4693bcd1df2446408b0d54"},"graph_snapshot":{"paper":{"title":"Decision-Making Behavior Evaluation Framework for LLMs under Uncertain Context","license":"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/","headline":"","cross_cats":["cs.CY","cs.HC","cs.LG","econ.TH"],"primary_cat":"cs.AI","authors_text":"Deming Chen, Jingru Jia, Junhao Pan, Paul E. McNamara, Zehua Yuan","submitted_at":"2024-06-10T02:14:19Z","abstract_excerpt":"When making decisions under uncertainty, individuals often deviate from rational behavior, which can be evaluated across three dimensions: risk preference, probability weighting, and loss aversion. Given the widespread use of large language models (LLMs) in decision-making processes, it is crucial to assess whether their behavior aligns with human norms and ethical expectations or exhibits potential biases. Several empirical studies have investigated the rationality and social behavior performance of LLMs, yet their internal decision-making tendencies and capabilities remain inadequately under"},"claims":{"count":0,"items":[],"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"source":{"id":"2406.05972","kind":"arxiv","version":2},"verdict":{"id":null,"model_set":{},"created_at":null,"strongest_claim":"","one_line_summary":"","pipeline_version":null,"weakest_assumption":"","pith_extraction_headline":""},"integrity":{"clean":true,"summary":{"advisory":0,"critical":0,"by_detector":{},"informational":0},"endpoint":"/pith/2406.05972/integrity.json","findings":[],"available":true,"detectors_run":[],"snapshot_sha256":"c28c3603d3b5d939e8dc4c7e95fa8dfce3d595e45f758748cecf8e644a296938"},"references":{"count":0,"sample":[],"resolved_work":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57","internal_anchors":0},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"author_claims":{"count":0,"strong_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1"},"aliases":[{"alias_kind":"arxiv","alias_value":"2406.05972","created_at":"2026-07-05T09:29:30.254651+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"arxiv_version","alias_value":"2406.05972v2","created_at":"2026-07-05T09:29:30.254651+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"doi","alias_value":"10.48550/arxiv.2406.05972","created_at":"2026-07-05T09:29:30.254651+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_12","alias_value":"ER7HQYFELB6C","created_at":"2026-07-05T09:29:30.254651+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_16","alias_value":"ER7HQYFELB6CPRVI","created_at":"2026-07-05T09:29:30.254651+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_8","alias_value":"ER7HQYFE","created_at":"2026-07-05T09:29:30.254651+00:00"}],"events":[],"event_summary":{},"paper_claims":[],"inbound_citations":{"count":2,"internal_anchor_count":0,"sample":[{"citing_arxiv_id":"2605.08556","citing_title":"Can Revealed Preferences Clarify LLM Alignment and Steering?","ref_index":6,"is_internal_anchor":false},{"citing_arxiv_id":"2605.02640","citing_title":"Trustworthy AI Suffers from Invariance Conflicts and Causality is The Solution","ref_index":6,"is_internal_anchor":false}]},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"sample":[],"anchors":[]},"links":{"html":"https://pith.science/pith/ER7HQYFELB6CPRVIW77ENF75X4","json":"https://pith.science/pith/ER7HQYFELB6CPRVIW77ENF75X4.json","graph_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/ER7HQYFELB6CPRVIW77ENF75X4/graph.json","events_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/ER7HQYFELB6CPRVIW77ENF75X4/events.json","paper":"https://pith.science/paper/ER7HQYFE"},"agent_actions":{"view_html":"https://pith.science/pith/ER7HQYFELB6CPRVIW77ENF75X4","download_json":"https://pith.science/pith/ER7HQYFELB6CPRVIW77ENF75X4.json","view_paper":"https://pith.science/paper/ER7HQYFE","resolve_alias":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/resolve?arxiv=2406.05972&json=true","fetch_graph":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/ER7HQYFELB6CPRVIW77ENF75X4/graph.json","fetch_events":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/ER7HQYFELB6CPRVIW77ENF75X4/events.json","actions":{"anchor_timestamp":"https://pith.science/pith/ER7HQYFELB6CPRVIW77ENF75X4/action/timestamp_anchor","attest_storage":"https://pith.science/pith/ER7HQYFELB6CPRVIW77ENF75X4/action/storage_attestation","attest_author":"https://pith.science/pith/ER7HQYFELB6CPRVIW77ENF75X4/action/author_attestation","sign_citation":"https://pith.science/pith/ER7HQYFELB6CPRVIW77ENF75X4/action/citation_signature","submit_replication":"https://pith.science/pith/ER7HQYFELB6CPRVIW77ENF75X4/action/replication_record"}},"created_at":"2026-07-05T09:29:30.254651+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-05T09:29:30.254651+00:00"}