Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Ge, Luise, Zhang, Yongyan, Vorobeychik, Yevgeniy
Format: Preprint
Published: 2026
Subjects:
Online Access:https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.15173
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1866913050160791552
author Ge, Luise
Zhang, Yongyan
Vorobeychik, Yevgeniy
author_facet Ge, Luise
Zhang, Yongyan
Vorobeychik, Yevgeniy
contents The use of large language models either as decision support systems, or in agentic workflows, is rapidly transforming the digital ecosystem. However, the understanding of LLM decision-making under uncertainty remains limited. We study LLM risky choices along two dimensions: (1) prospect representation (based on an explicit representation or outcome history) and (2) decision rationale (explanation). Our study, which involves 20 frontier and open LLMs, is complemented by a matched human subjects experiment, which provides one reference point, while an expected payoff maximizing rational agent model provides another. We find that LLMs cluster into two categories: reasoning models (RMs) and conversational models (CMs). RMs tend towards rational behavior, are insensitive to the order of prospects, gain/loss framing, and explanations, and behave similarly whether prospects are explicit or presented via a history of outcomes. CMs are significantly less rational, slightly more human-like, sensitive to prospect ordering, framing, and explanation, and exhibit a large description-history gap. Paired comparisons of open LLMs suggest that a key factor differentiating RMs and CMs is training for mathematical reasoning.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2602_15173
institution arXiv
publishDate 2026
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle Mind the (DH) Gap! A Contrast in Risky Choices Between Reasoning and Conversational LLMs
Ge, Luise
Zhang, Yongyan
Vorobeychik, Yevgeniy
Artificial Intelligence
The use of large language models either as decision support systems, or in agentic workflows, is rapidly transforming the digital ecosystem. However, the understanding of LLM decision-making under uncertainty remains limited. We study LLM risky choices along two dimensions: (1) prospect representation (based on an explicit representation or outcome history) and (2) decision rationale (explanation). Our study, which involves 20 frontier and open LLMs, is complemented by a matched human subjects experiment, which provides one reference point, while an expected payoff maximizing rational agent model provides another. We find that LLMs cluster into two categories: reasoning models (RMs) and conversational models (CMs). RMs tend towards rational behavior, are insensitive to the order of prospects, gain/loss framing, and explanations, and behave similarly whether prospects are explicit or presented via a history of outcomes. CMs are significantly less rational, slightly more human-like, sensitive to prospect ordering, framing, and explanation, and exhibit a large description-history gap. Paired comparisons of open LLMs suggest that a key factor differentiating RMs and CMs is training for mathematical reasoning.
title Mind the (DH) Gap! A Contrast in Risky Choices Between Reasoning and Conversational LLMs
topic Artificial Intelligence
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.15173