Imprecise Belief Fusion Improves Multi-agent Social Learning

In social learning, agents learn not only from direct evidence but also through interactions with their peers. We investigate the role of imprecision in such interactions and ask whether it can improve the effectiveness of the collective learning process. To that end we propose a model of social learning where beliefs are equivalent to formulas in a propositional language, and where agents learn from each other by combining their beliefs according to a fusion operator. The latter is parametrised so as to allow for different levels of imprecision, where a more imprecise fusion operator tends to generates a more imprecise fused belief when the two combined beliefs differ. In this context we describe both difference equation models and agent-based simulations of social learning under a variety of conditions and with different initial biases. The results presented suggest that for populations with a strong initial bias towards incorrect beliefs some level of imprecision in fusion can improve learning accuracy across a range of learning conditions. Furthermore, such benefits of imprecision are consistent with a stability analysis of the fixed points of the proposed difference equation models.

When Shippers Become Algorithms: Candidate Exposure, Information Design, and the Concentration of LLM-Mediated Freight Markets

Shippers are beginning to delegate carrier selection to large language model (LLM) agents. We ask what such delegation does to a freight matching market, and which platform design choices contain it. We carried out agent-based simulations in which fifty shipper agents, built on commercial LLMs from OpenAI (GPT), Anthropic (Claude), and Google (Gemini), procure truckload capacity for thirty days. The market implements the rules of digital freight matching: each load is offered down the shipper's ranked list of carriers (waterfall tendering), carriers have daily capacity limits, spot prices respond to congestion, and carrier ratings accumulate with transactions. We found three risks and one remedy that works. Agents converged at once: for a fixed sampled carrier population, the same carrier was the modal first choice of every model on day one, attracting up to 76% of requests. Because each agent picks from its own randomly drawn list of displayed candidates, the platform controls how many options each shipper sees; concentration rose steeply once lists exceeded about ten carriers, with the onset differing across models. Which carriers ended up dominant varied widely from one sampled market to another, and displaying true quality instead of estimated ratings changed neither the level nor this variability (by design, quality affects only what agents see, never delivery outcomes). Against these risks, disclosing each carrier's remaining daily capacity cut concentration by a third and doubled shipper surplus, while vendor diversification, list-order randomization, and popularity display showed no clearly detectable effect. Platform information design, ahead of model choice or model regulation, is the lever that works.

Poor Man's Agentic Modeling: Simulating Large LLM-Agent Societies on a Laptop

Simulating societies of many large language model (LLM) agents is expensive, yet the questions asked of such simulations are usually macroscopic: phase behaviour, stylised facts, and scaling with the number of agents $N$, not the cognition of any single agent. We turn a statistical-physics observation into a method: replace each LLM agent by a low-parameter model fitted from a few hundred to a few thousand cheap queries, then run the society at any $N$ on a laptop. Whether this works is decided before the simulation runs, chiefly by what each agent perceives. We introduce an [interaction order x memory] taxonomy that maps perception and memory to an effective theory and a predicted $N$-trend of the surrogate error. We validate it on a faithful reimplementation of the LLM macroeconomy EconAgent and seven further named LLM simulations, with agent decisions cloned from genuine LLM elicitations (primarily DeepSeek) for a few dollars; the predicted error trends hold cell by cell, and the two refuted predictions, both on a strongly saturating response and traced to its curvature, are themselves matched quantitatively by the theory with no free parameters.

Forgetting Our Way to Shared Meaning: Effects of Forgetting on Conceptual Alignment in a Non-Partnership Coordination Game

Shared meaning in language requires people to learn and agree on categories. We ask how characteristics of agents' memories change the emergence and evolution of shared meaning. Without a coordination game, models of conceptual semantics cannot explain how shared meaning emerges and changes in groups of people; however, existing games assume that players share payoffs in a partnership setting. We model conceptual alignment as a non-partnership game and illustrate differences in actual and perceived conceptual convergence from counterfactual simulations using agents with varying levels of adaptiveness and memory degradation. We found that adaptive players achieved actual convergence faster and had closer final conceptual regions than non-adaptive players, while non-adaptive players perceived convergence earlier. Weighing novel information less over time resulted in more stable agreements than fixing the weight of novel information. Memory features are critical to the emergence and evolution of actual and perceived convergence.

Reproducing human biases in route choice using large language models: Toward scalable behavioral modeling

Human choice behavior, including route choice, exhibits systematic behavioral biases that deviate from the assumptions of full rationality. Cumulative prospect theory (CPT) has been widely recognized as an effective framework for characterizing such behavioral patterns. However, its large-scale application, particularly in simulation and agent-based modeling, critically depends on specifying individual-level CPT parameters, which remain a major bottleneck. Conventional approaches typically rely on surveys and controlled experiments to calibrate CPT parameters, yet these methods are difficult to generalize and often fail to capture the full diversity of human decision-making. To address this challenge, this paper investigates whether large language models (LLMs) can reproduce human behavioral biases in choice-making without explicit specification of prospect-theoretic parameters. Using route choice as a representative scenario, we design a behavioral evaluation framework and systematically compare LLM-generated decisions with established human behavioral patterns predicted by CPT. Experimental results demonstrate that LLMs are capable of reproducing non-rational human choice biases and can exhibit decision behaviors consistent with prospect-theoretic effects under uncertainty. These findings suggest that generative AI models may provide a scalable alternative for modeling human decision processes and offer a promising foundation for next-generation large-scale agent-based simulation and AI-driven behavioral research.

Reliability and Identifiability in Persona-Trained Monte Carlo: Variance Decomposition, Stability Bounds, and the Identifiability of Heterogeneous News Reaction

Persona-Trained Monte Carlo (PTMC) estimates distributions of market-outcome functionals by repeatedly simulating limit-order-book interaction among $K$ neural policy bots whose behavioral personas are drawn from a learned heterogeneity distribution $\mathcal{P}$. This paper develops the statistical theory that makes the word "reliable" precise for such estimators. We decompose estimator variance into a persona-draw component $σ_P^2$ and a within-run component $σ_w^2$, give unbiased ANOVA estimators of both, and derive the variance-optimal allocation of a fixed compute budget between outer persona draws and inner replications. A coupling-based stability bound quantifies how misestimation of $\mathcal{P}$ and error in the trained policy propagate into the estimand, yielding a three-term total-error budget whose terms are separately estimable; a uniform-in-horizon version holds under a Doeblin condition on the market chain. The main contribution is an identification theory for heterogeneous news reaction: under a fixed response nonlinearity, the aggregate impact curve $A(z)=\mathbb{E}_Q[g(ηz)]$ detects heterogeneous news sensitivity through a strict Jensen gap and identifies the distribution $Q$ locally via odd moments and Hausdorff determinacy, with sharp failure when the response family is unknown. We provide $\sqrt{n}$-consistent estimators and a boundary-corrected test of homogeneous news reaction. Two separation theorems delimit when PTMC is provably preferable to homogeneous-population simulators and reduced-form forecasters, formalizing an irreducible Jensen bias floor and the Lucas critique as a minimax limit on intervention extrapolation. All proofs are given in full; guarantees are classified as unconditional (Monte Carlo convergence), conditional worst-case (the error budget), or open (the large-$K$ mean-field limit).

A Resilience-as-a-Service assessment framework for coordinated disruption response in interdependent urban transit systems

Urban public transport disruptions require rapid response strategies, yet existing studies rarely provide a decision support framework to compare alternative disruption response solutions using a common set of dynamic, passenger, operator, and environment oriented indicators. This paper proposes a KPI-driven, time-indexed framework to assess the resilience of disruption response solutions in urban transit systems. The framework combines an optimization model with a behavioral evaluation in agent-based simulation. It also underlays the secondary service degradation induced on helper lines when in-service vehicles are withdrawn to support the disrupted corridor. Rather than treating resilience as a single score, it evaluates complementary dimensions including vulnerability, adaptability, robustness, resilience loss, responsiveness, cost-based performance, emissions, and equity. The framework is implemented for the RER B transit line in the Ile-de-France (Paris) network. Results show that the coordinated strategy provides the most balanced resilience profile, combining high service continuity with lower total disruption cost than single mode alternatives, while also improving equity and maintaining competitive environmental performance. Sensitivity analysis further identifies the disruption conditions under which coordinated multimodal response is most valuable.

An Infectious Disease Spread Simulation Based on Large Language Model Decision Making

Modelling individual decision-making during infectious disease outbreaks is crucial for understanding behavioural dynamics and informing effective public health interventions. Prior work has shown that large language models can simulate realistic human behaviour by generating agent decisions based on demographic prompts and situational context. We build on this foundation with a spatially grounded, agent-based simulation framework that integrates LLM-generated decisions about self-reported influenza-like illness into a census-based synthetic population of agents. Location is treated as a central feature: agents are assigned to spatial units within cities, capturing the spatial distributions of different demographic groups using real-world census data and enabling geographically diverse behavioural modelling. We implement and compare three decision scenarios, independent reasoning, household influence, and message framing, and simulate self-reporting outcomes in San Francisco and Atlanta. Results reveal that income and education are the dominant drivers of reporting rate variation, with smaller but consistent effects from geography, LLM model choice, and message framing. Our framework generates synthetic data that captures both social and geographic heterogeneity, supporting spatial epidemiological modelling and bias-aware behavioural analysis.

Neetyabhas: A Framework for Uncertainty-Aware Public Policy Optimization in Rational Agent-Based Models

Purpose The WHO's COVID-19 non-pharmaceutical interventions (e.g., lockdowns, vaccinations) effectively curb transmission but impose heavy economic strains. Existing research often neglects individual behaviors and falsely assumes perfect infection tracking and flawless policy execution, failing to account for real-world uncertainties and errors. Methods We propose an integrative approach incorporating uncertainties in both epidemic measurement (infections/hospitalizations) and policy implementation. We built a simulation model of 1,000 individuals making real-time choices regarding mask-wearing, vaccination, and shopping. Concurrently, policymakers deploy interventions (lockdowns, mandates) based on health and economic observations. This framework is driven by hierarchical reinforcement learning agents, utilizing deep Q-networks alongside uncertainty-aware policy gradient variants (DDPG and TD3). Results The simulations effectively managed the epidemic's progression. Masking and vaccinations proved highly effective, significantly reducing both the outbreak's peak height and duration. By integrating individual behaviors, policy uncertainties, and multifaceted interventions, our dynamic control approach successfully mitigated the epidemic's impact. Conclusions Our model overcomes previous research limitations by embedding uncertainty and human behavior into public health policy frameworks. The simulation demonstrates that accounting for individual choices and imperfect data is crucial for designing effective interventions during complex pandemics, with masks and vaccines serving as pivotal tools.