Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
The paper identifies that increasing reasoning intensity in LLM agents exacerbates value polarization and reduces behavioral fidelity when evaluated against real-world data. To address this, they introduce the Context-Value-Action (CVA) architecture, inspired by the S-O-R model, which decouples action generation from cognitive reasoning using a Value Verifier trained on human data. Experiments on a new benchmark, CVABench, demonstrate that CVA significantly outperforms existing methods in mitigating polarization and improving behavioral fidelity.
LLM agents become *less* like humans as you crank up the reasoning, unless you explicitly model value activation with a Value Verifier trained on real-world interaction data.
Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown promise in simulating human behavior, yet existing agents often exhibit behavioral rigidity, a flaw frequently masked by the self-referential bias of current"LLM-as-a-judge"evaluations. By evaluating against empirical ground truth, we reveal a counter-intuitive phenomenon: increasing the intensity of prompt-driven reasoning does not enhance fidelity but rather exacerbates value polarization, collapsing population diversity. To address this, we propose the Context-Value-Action (CVA) architecture, grounded in the Stimulus-Organism-Response (S-O-R) model and Schwartz's Theory of Basic Human Values. Unlike methods relying on self-verification, CVA decouples action generation from cognitive reasoning via a novel Value Verifier trained on authentic human data to explicitly model dynamic value activation. Experiments on CVABench, which comprises over 1.1 million real-world interaction traces, demonstrate that CVA significantly outperforms baselines. Our approach effectively mitigates polarization while offering superior behavioral fidelity and interpretability.
