STEER: Assessing the Economic Rationality of Large Language Models
Narun Krishnamurthi Raman, Taylor Lundy, Samuel Joseph Amouyal, Yoav Levine, Kevin Leyton-Brown, Moshe Tennenholtz
Abstract
There is increasing interest in using LLMs as decision-making "agents." Doing so includes many degrees of freedom: which model should be used; how should it be prompted; should it be asked to introspect, conduct chain-of-thought reasoning, etc? Settling these questions-and more broadly, determining whether an LLM agent is reliable enough to be trusted-requires a methodology for assessing such an agent's economic rationality. In this paper, we provide one. We begin by surveying the economic literature on rational decision making, taxonomizing a large set of finegrained "elements" that an agent should exhibit, along with dependencies between them. We then propose a benchmark distribution called STEER (Systematic and Tuneable Evaluation of Economic Rationality) that quantitatively scores an LLMs performance on these elements and, combined with a user-provided rubric, produces a "STEER report card." Finally, we describe the results of a large-scale empirical experiment with 14 different LLMs, characterizing the both current state of the art and the impact of different model sizes on models' ability to exhibit rational behavior. Preprint. Under review.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Cited by top-tier papers6
- Utility Engineering: Analyzing and Controlling Emergent Value Systems in AIsMantas Mazeika, Xuwang Yin, Rishub Tamirisa, Jaehyuk Lim et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 84 citations
- Is Your LLM Overcharging You? Tokenization, Transparency, and IncentivesAnder Artola Velasco, Stratis Tsirtsis, Nastaran Okati, Manuel Gomez-RodriguezICML 2026 · 16 citations
- Do Large Language Models Know What They Are Capable Of?Casey O. Barkan, Sidney Black, Oliver SourbutICLR 2026 · 11 citations
- Reasoning Models Are Test Exploiters: Rethinking Multiple ChoiceNarun Raman, Taylor Lundy, Kevin Leyton-BrownICML 2026 · 10 citations
- Are Large Language Models Sensitive to the Motives Behind Communication?Addison J. Wu, Ryan Liu, Kerem Oktar, Theodore R. Sumers et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 9 citations
Builds on13
- Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language ModelsJason Wei, Xuezhi Wang, Dale Schuurmans, Maarten Bosma et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 22,562 citations
- Measuring Massive Multitask Language UnderstandingDan Hendrycks, Collin Burns, Steven Basart, Andy Zou et al.ICLR 2021 · 7,905 citations
- Toolformer: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Use ToolsTimo Schick, Jane Dwivedi-Yu, Roberto Dessì, Roberta Raileanu et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 5,989 citations
- Generative Agents: Interactive Simulacra of Human BehaviorJoon Sung Park, Joseph C. O'Brien, Carrie Jun Cai, Meredith Ringel Morris et al.UIST 2023 · 1,882 citations
- HuggingGPT: Solving AI Tasks with ChatGPT and its Friends in Hugging FaceYongliang Shen, Kaitao Song, Xu Tan, Dongsheng Li et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 1,778 citations
Related papers
- Distributive Fairness in Large Language Models: Evaluating Alignment with Human ValuesHadi Hosseini, Samarth KhannaNeurIPS 2025 · 14 citations
- SteerConf: Steering LLMs for Confidence ElicitationZiang Zhou, Tianyuan Jin, Jieming Shi, Qing LiNeurIPS 2025 · 23 citations
- STEER-BENCH: A Benchmark for Evaluating the Steerability of Large Language ModelsKai Chen, Zihao He, Taiwei Shi, Kristina LermanEMNLP 2025 · 1 citation
- Noise, Adaptation, and Strategy: Assessing LLM Fidelity in Decision-MakingYuanjun Feng, Vivek Choudhary, Yash Raj ShresthaEMNLP 2025 · 2 citations
- Market-Bench: Benchmarking Large Language Models on Economic and Trade CompetitionYushuo Zheng, Huiyu Duan, Zicheng Zhang, Yucheng Zhu et al.ACL 2026 · 1 citation
