LLM-driven multi-agent-based simulations have been gaining traction with applications in game-theoretic and social simulations. While most implementations seek to exploit or evaluate LLM-agentic reasoning, they often do so with a weak notion of agency and simplified architectures. We implement a role-based multi-agent strategic interaction framework tailored to sophisticated recursive reasoners, providing the means for systematic in-depth development and evaluation of strategic reasoning. Our game environment is governed by the umpire responsible for facilitating games, from matchmaking through move validation to environment management. Players incorporate state-of-the-art LLMs in their decision mechanism, relying on a formal hypergame-based model of hierarchical beliefs. We use one-shot, 2-player beauty contests to evaluate the recursive reasoning capabilities of the latest LLMs, providing a comparison to an established baseline model from economics and data from human experiments. Furthermore, we introduce the foundations of an alternative semantic measure of reasoning to the k-level theory. Our experiments show that artificial reasoners can outperform the baseline model in terms of both approximating human behaviour and reaching the optimal solution.

Game-theoretic simulations are a versatile tool for exploring interactions of both natural and artificial agents. However, modelling real-world scenarios and developing simulations often require substantial human expertise and effort. To streamline this process, we present a framework that enables the autoformalization of game-theoretic scenarios using agents augmented by large language models (LLMs). In this approach, LLM-augmented agents translate natural language scenario descriptions into executable logic programs that define the rules of each game, validating these programs for syntactic accuracy. A tournament simulation is then conducted, during which the agents test the functionality of the generated games by playing them. When a ground truth payoff matrix is available, an exact semantic validation can also be performed. The validated games can then be used in further simulations to assess the effectiveness of different strategies. We evaluate our approach on a diverse set of 55 natural language descriptions across five well-known 2x2 simultaneous-move games, demonstrating 96% syntactic and 87% semantic correctness in the generated game rules. Additionally, we assess the LLM-augmented agents' capability to autoformalize strategies for gameplay.

Reasoning is an essential component of human intelligence as it plays a fundamental role in our ability to think critically, support responsible decisions, and solve challenging problems. Traditionally, AI has addressed reasoning in the context of logic-based representations of knowledge. However, the recent leap forward in natural language processing, with the emergence of language models based on transformers, is hinting at the possibility that these models exhibit reasoning abilities, particularly as they grow in size and are trained on more data. Despite ongoing discussions about what reasoning is in language models, it is still not easy to pin down to what extent these models are actually capable of reasoning. The goal of this workshop is to create a platform for researchers from different disciplines and/or AI perspectives, to explore approaches and techniques with the aim to reconcile reasoning between language models using transformers and using logic-based representations. The specific objectives include analyzing the reasoning abilities of language models measured alongside KR methods, injecting KR-style reasoning abilities into language models (including by neuro-symbolic means), and formalizing the kind of reasoning language models carry out. This exploration aims to uncover how language models can effectively integrate and leverage knowledge and reasoning with it, thus improving their application and utility in areas where precision and reliability are a key requirement.

This paper bridges the gap between mathematical heuristic strategies learned from Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL) in automated agent negotiation, and comprehensible, natural language explanations. Our aim is to make these strategies more accessible to non-experts. By leveraging traditional Natural Language Processing (NLP) techniques and Large Language Models (LLMs) equipped with Transformers, we outline how parts of DRL strategies composed of parts within strategy templates can be transformed into user-friendly, human-like English narratives. To achieve this, we present a top-level algorithm that involves parsing mathematical expressions of strategy templates, semantically interpreting variables and structures, generating rule-based primary explanations, and utilizing a Generative Pre-trained Transformer (GPT) model to refine and contextualize these explanations. Subsequent customization for varied audiences and meticulous validation processes in an example illustrate the applicability and potential of this approach.

The evolution of Generative Pre-trained Transformer (GPT) models has led to significant advancements in various natural language processing applications, particularly in legal textual entailment. We present an analysis of GPT-3.5 (ChatGPT) and GPT-4 performances on COLIEE Task 4 dataset, a prominent benchmark in this domain. The study encompasses data from Heisei 18 (2006) to Reiwa 3 (2021), exploring the models' abilities to discern entailment relationships within Japanese statute law across different periods. Our preliminary experimental results unveil intriguing insights into the models' strengths and weaknesses in handling legal textual entailment tasks, as well as the patterns observed in model performance. In the context of proprietary models with undisclosed architectures and weights, black-box analysis becomes crucial for evaluating their capabilities. We discuss the influence of training data distribution and the implications on the models' generalizability. This analysis serves as a foundation for future research, aiming to optimize GPT-based models and enable their successful adoption in legal information extraction and entailment applications.

Negation is a fundamental aspect of natural language, playing a critical role in communication and comprehension. Our study assesses the negation detection performance of Generative Pre-trained Transformer (GPT) models, specifically GPT-2, GPT-3, GPT-3.5, and GPT-4. We focus on the identification of negation in natural language using a zero-shot prediction approach applied to our custom xNot360 dataset. Our approach examines sentence pairs labeled to indicate whether the second sentence negates the first. Our findings expose a considerable performance disparity among the GPT models, with GPT-4 surpassing its counterparts and GPT-3.5 displaying a marked performance reduction. The overall proficiency of the GPT models in negation detection remains relatively modest, indicating that this task pushes the boundaries of their natural language understanding capabilities. We not only highlight the constraints of GPT models in handling negation but also emphasize the importance of logical reliability in high-stakes domains such as healthcare, science, and law.

We present a novel bilateral negotiation model that allows a self-interested agent to learn how to negotiate over multiple issues in the presence of user preference uncertainty. The model relies upon interpretable strategy templates representing the tactics the agent should employ during the negotiation and learns template parameters to maximize the average utility received over multiple negotiations, thus resulting in optimal bid acceptance and generation. Our model also uses deep reinforcement learning to evaluate threshold utility values, for those tactics that require them, thereby deriving optimal utilities for every environment state. To handle user preference uncertainty, the model relies on a stochastic search to find user model that best agrees with a given partial preference profile. Multi-objective optimization and multi-criteria decision-making methods are applied at negotiation time to generate Pareto-optimal outcomes thereby increasing the number of successful (win-win) negotiations. Rigorous experimental evaluations show that the agent employing our model outperforms the winning agents of the 10th Automated Negotiating Agents Competition (ANAC'19) in terms of individual as well as social-welfare utilities.

Abstract--With the aim of designing automated tools that assist in the video game quality assurance process, we frame the problem of identifying bugs in video games as an anomaly detection (AD) problem. We develop State-State Siamese Networks (S3N) as an efficient deep metric learning approach to AD in this context and explore how it may be used as part of an automated testing tool. Finally, we show by empirical evaluation on a series of Atari games, that S3N is able to learn a meaningful embedding, and consequently is able to identify various common types of video game bugs. Video game development companies take significant steps at all stages of development to reduce the likelihood of bugs appearing in release code. These steps range from the use of software development paradigms early in the process to heavy investment in Quality Assurance (QA) closer to release.

Gaussian Processes (GPs) are widely used tools in statistics, machine learning, robotics, computer vision, and scientific computation. However, despite their popularity, they can be difficult to apply; all but the simplest classification or regression applications require specification and inference over complex covariance functions that do not admit simple analytical posteriors. This paper shows how to embed Gaussian processes in any higher-order probabilistic programming language, using an idiom based on memoization, and demonstrates its utility by implementing and extending classic and state-of-the-art GP applications. The interface to Gaussian processes, called gpmem, takes an arbitrary real-valued computational process as input and returns a statistical emulator that automatically improve as the original process is invoked and its input-output behavior is recorded. The flexibility of gpmem is illustrated via three applications: (i) robust GP regression with hierarchical hyper-parameter learning, (ii) discovering symbolic expressions from time-series data by fully Bayesian structure learning over kernels generated by a stochastic grammar, and (iii) a bandit formulation of Bayesian optimization with automatic inference and action selection. All applications share a single 50-line Python library and require fewer than 20 lines of probabilistic code each.

This paper presents the computational logic foundations of a model of agency called the KGP (Knowledge, Goals and Plan model. This model allows the specification of heterogeneous agents that can interact with each other, and can exhibit both proactive and reactive behaviour allowing them to function in dynamic environments by adjusting their goals and plans when changes happen in such environments. KGP provides a highly modular agent architecture that integrates a collection of reasoning and physical capabilities, synthesised within transitions that update the agents state in response to reasoning, sensing and acting. Transitions are orchestrated by cycle theories that specify the order in which transitions are executed while taking into account the dynamic context and agent preferences, as well as selection operators for providing inputs to transitions.