Sneheel Sarangi

Sneheel Sarangi, Maximilian Puelma Touzel, Aurélien Bück-Kaeffer et al.

LLMs are increasingly deployed to simulate social interactions, yet many of the existing simulators remain ad hoc and monolithic. This lack of architectural standardization prevents reproducible research and complicates downstream evaluation. We advance a rigorous science of LLM-based multi-agent simulation by modularizing core components into Environments, Agents, Simulation engines, and Evaluation metrics (EASE). We demonstrate the utility of EASE configuration by wrapping it in an experimental study schema for orchestrating workflows centered around answering explicit research questions in generated scenarios. We contribute SiliSocS, an open-source, research-ready Silicon Society Sandbox implementing a study-structured EASE configuration to enable highly configurable and reproducible LLM-based social simulations. Using SiliSocS and EASE, we present three case studies, showcasing the system's comprehensive assessment of existing questions, ability to dive deeper into complex questions, and elaboration of existing studies, respectively. Together, these case studies highlight the limitations of current modeling approaches and isolate the impacts of design choices on key results.

Chandler Smith, Marwa Abdulhai, Manfred Diaz et al.

Large Language Model (LLM) agents have demonstrated impressive capabilities for social interaction and are increasingly being deployed in situations where they might engage with both human and artificial agents. These interactions represent a critical frontier for LLM-based agents, yet existing evaluation methods fail to measure how well these capabilities generalize to novel social situations. In this paper, we introduce a method for evaluating the ability of LLM-based agents to cooperate in zero-shot, mixed-motive environments using Concordia, a natural language multi-agent simulation environment. Our method measures general cooperative intelligence by testing an agent's ability to identify and exploit opportunities for mutual gain across diverse partners and contexts. We present empirical results from the NeurIPS 2024 Concordia Contest, where agents were evaluated on their ability to achieve mutual gains across a suite of diverse scenarios ranging from negotiation to collective action problems. Our findings reveal significant gaps between current agent capabilities and the robust generalization required for reliable cooperation, particularly in scenarios demanding persuasion and norm enforcement.

Aurélien Bück-Kaeffer, Sneheel Sarangi, Maximilian Puelma Touzel et al.

Studies attempting to simulate human behavior with $\textit{Silicon Societies}$ grow in numbers while LLM-only social networks have started appearing outside of controlled settings. However, the design space of these networks remains under-studied, which contributes to a gap in validating model realism. To enable future works to make more informed design decisions, we perform a systematic analysis of the consequences and interactions of key design choices in simulated social networks, including the choice of base model used to model individual agents, and how they are connected to each other. Using surveys as a proxy for agent opinions, our findings suggest that the geometry of the design space is non-trivial, with some parameters behaving in additive ways while others display more complex interactions. In particular, the choice of the base LLM is the most important variable impacting the simulation outcomes.

Sneheel Sarangi, Maha Elgarf, Hanan Salam

Theory of Mind (ToM) is the ability to understand and reflect on the mental states of others. Although this capability is crucial for human interaction, testing on Large Language Models (LLMs) reveals that they possess only a rudimentary understanding of it. Although the most capable closed-source LLMs have come close to human performance on some ToM tasks, they still perform poorly on complex variations of the task that involve more structured reasoning. In this work, we utilize the concept of "pretend-play", or ``Simulation Theory'' from cognitive psychology to propose ``Decompose-ToM'': an LLM-based inference algorithm that improves model performance on complex ToM tasks. We recursively simulate user perspectives and decompose the ToM task into a simpler set of functions: subject identification, question-reframing, world model updation, and knowledge availability. We test the algorithm on higher-order ToM tasks and a task testing for ToM capabilities in a conversational setting, demonstrating that our approach shows significant improvement across models compared to baseline methods while requiring minimal prompt tuning across tasks and no additional model training.

Maximilian Puelma Touzel, Sneheel Sarangi, Austin Welch et al.

The rise of AI-driven manipulation poses significant risks to societal trust and democratic processes. Yet, studying these effects in real-world settings at scale is ethically and logistically impractical, highlighting a need for simulation tools that can model these dynamics in controlled settings to enable experimentation with possible defenses. We present a simulation environment designed to address this. We elaborate upon the Concordia framework that simulates offline, `real life' activity by adding online interactions to the simulation through social media with the integration of a Mastodon server. We improve simulation efficiency and information flow, and add a set of measurement tools, particularly longitudinal surveys. We demonstrate the simulator with a tailored example in which we track agents' political positions and show how partisan manipulation of agents can affect election results.

Sneheel Sarangi, Hanan Salam

Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated emergent capabilities in complex reasoning, largely spurred by rule-based Reinforcement Learning (RL) techniques applied during the post-training. This has raised the question of whether similar methods can instill more nuanced, human-like social intelligence, such as a Theory of Mind (ToM), in LLMs. This paper investigates whether small-scale LLMs can acquire a robust and generalizable ToM capability through RL with verifiable rewards (RLVR). We conduct a systematic evaluation by training models on various combinations of prominent ToM datasets (HiToM, ExploreToM, FANToM) and testing for generalization on held-out datasets (e.g., OpenToM). Our findings indicate that small LLMs struggle to develop a generic ToM capability. While performance on in-distribution tasks improves, this capability fails to transfer to unseen ToM tasks with different characteristics. Furthermore, we demonstrate that prolonged RL training leads to models ``hacking'' the statistical patterns of the training datasets, resulting in significant performance gains on in-domain data but no change, or degradation of performance on out-of-distribution tasks. This suggests the learned behavior is a form of narrow overfitting rather than the acquisition of a true, abstract ToM capability.