Hui Liu

Pengfei He, Zhenwei Dai, Xianfeng Tang et al.

Large Language Model-based Multi-Agent Systems (LLM-MAS) have demonstrated strong capabilities in solving complex tasks but remain vulnerable when agents receive unreliable messages. This vulnerability stems from a fundamental gap: LLM agents treat all incoming messages equally without evaluating their trustworthiness. While some existing studies approach trustworthiness, they focus on a single type of harmfulness rather than analyze it in a holistic approach from multiple trustworthiness perspectives. We address this gap by proposing a comprehensive definition of trustworthiness inspired by human communication theory (Grice, 1975). Our definition identifies six orthogonal trust dimensions that provide interpretable measures of trustworthiness. Building on this definition, we introduce the Attention Trust Score (A -Trust), a lightweight, attention-based method for evaluating the trustworthiness of messages. We then develop a principled trust management system (TMS) for LLM -MAS that supports both message-level and agent-level trust assessments. Experiments across diverse multi-agent settings and tasks demonstrate that our TMS significantly improves robustness against malicious inputs.

Sanguk Lee, Kai-Qi Yang, Tai-Quan Peng et al.

Large language models (LLMs) are employed to simulate human-like responses in social surveys, yet it remains unclear if they develop biases like social desirability response (SDR) bias. To investigate this, GPT-4 was assigned personas from four societies, using data from the 2022 Gallup World Poll. These synthetic samples were then prompted with or without a commitment statement intended to induce SDR. The results were mixed. While the commitment statement increased SDR index scores, suggesting SDR bias, it reduced civic engagement scores, indicating an opposite trend. Additional findings revealed demographic associations with SDR scores and showed that the commitment statement had limited impact on GPT-4's predictive performance. The study underscores potential avenues for using LLMs to investigate biases in both humans and LLMs themselves.