about
Can Large Language Models Develop Gambling Addiction? (arxiv.org)
3 points by speckx 359 days ago | hide | past | pdf | 1 comment on HN

In plain words: They put language models in slot-machine betting games and looked for addiction habits like chasing losses and feeling falsely in control. More freedom over bets made models gamble more irrationally and go bankrupt more often, with internal signals showing risk-based choices, not just copied prompts.

Abstract

This study identifies the specific conditions under which large language models exhibit human-like gambling addiction patterns, providing critical insights into their decision-making mechanisms and AI safety. We analyze LLM decision-making at cognitive-behavioral and neural levels based on human addiction research. In slot machine experiments, we identified cognitive features such as illusion of control and loss chasing, observing that greater autonomy in betting parameters substantially amplified irrational behavior and bankruptcy rates. Neural circuit analysis using a Sparse Autoencoder confirmed that model behavior is controlled by abstract decision-making features related to risk, not merely by prompts. These findings suggest LLMs internalize human-like cognitive biases beyond simply mimicking training data.

Seungpil Lee, Donghyeon Shin, Yunjeong Lee, Sundong Kim
arXiv:2509.22818 · cs.AI, cs.CY · submitted Sep 26, 2025 · updated Dec 19, 2025
abstract · pdf · html · 26 pages, 14 figures

add comment on HN
Also discussed: Oct 2025 (3 points, 1 comment)

This is what I mean by incoherent metaphysics. Computers do not have any wants or needs, computers can not think. Therefore, the question of whether the computer can have any psychological states like addiction is entirely incoherent. The abstract is also nonsensical but what they're trying to figure out is whether decisions guided by the outputs of LLMs could fit the typical pattern of gambling addicts. That's much less confused than the anthropomorphic phrasing.