It seems like the vast majority of CICERO's pitches are "here's an optimal play for you, you should do it not only because it's good for you but also because it's good for us." In other words, pointing players towards rationality. Of course, high level players in any social game are far more likely than their less skilled counterparts to want to make the rational play, so it's likely that there's some selection bias influencing how effective that salesmanship is. However, even high level players are governed by the emotions that break down game theory!
Here's an example case: I'm curious to see how CICERO responded in situations where they talk to Human A about a plan that requires Human B, but A doesn't trust B. How does CICERO respond to that? It may very well be that it doesn't get in those spots because it thinks about who's likeliest to align with whom and in what way. In this sense, it's playing to its strengths and not attempting plays it can't execute, which is an impressive strategic feat. But of course, I'm interested in seeing it try things it can't do - in this case, try a different mode of persuasion.
TheAsianIsGamin t1_ixplwod wrote
Reply to comment by Amortize_Me_Daddy in [R] Human-level play in the game of Diplomacy by combining language models with strategic reasoning — Meta AI by hughbzhang
It seems like the vast majority of CICERO's pitches are "here's an optimal play for you, you should do it not only because it's good for you but also because it's good for us." In other words, pointing players towards rationality. Of course, high level players in any social game are far more likely than their less skilled counterparts to want to make the rational play, so it's likely that there's some selection bias influencing how effective that salesmanship is. However, even high level players are governed by the emotions that break down game theory!
Here's an example case: I'm curious to see how CICERO responded in situations where they talk to Human A about a plan that requires Human B, but A doesn't trust B. How does CICERO respond to that? It may very well be that it doesn't get in those spots because it thinks about who's likeliest to align with whom and in what way. In this sense, it's playing to its strengths and not attempting plays it can't execute, which is an impressive strategic feat. But of course, I'm interested in seeing it try things it can't do - in this case, try a different mode of persuasion.