PDF.

Today’s leading AI models engage in sophisticated behaviour when placed in strategic competition. They spontaneously attempt deception, signaling intentions they do not intend to follow; they demonstrate rich theory of mind, reasoning about adversary beliefs and anticipating their actions; and they exhibit credible metacognitive self-awareness, assessing their own strategic abilities before deciding how to act.

Here we present findings from a crisis simulation in which three frontier large language models (GPT-5.2, Claude Sonnet 4, Gemini 3 Flash) play opposing leaders in a nuclear crisis.

  • Fedditor385@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 hours ago

    I seriously don’t understand how anyone would expect any other outcome. It has a goal - to win, or not to lose. What is the logical way to have the highest probability of winning? Use strongest weapon. You wouldn’t expect it to tell you how to build a rain catchment and filter system when you tell it your thirsty.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 hours ago

      It has a goal - to win, or not to lose.

      Its model doesn’t include the long term consequences of a nuclear strike because it’s core mission isn’t to preserve human life.

      Same reason you don’t see AIs constantly interjecting the need to cut carbon emissions or redistribute private wealth or demilitarize as a solution for resolving conflicts.

      This isn’t what the machines were built to do.

      • Fedditor385@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        They are trained to achieve goals. If your goal ist to win a war, but also not kill anyone… its incompatible.