As agentic AI becomes more widespread, agents with distinct and possibly conflicting goals will interact in complex ways. These multi-agent interactions pose a fundamental challenge, particularly in social dilemmas, where agents' individual incentives can undermine collective welfare. While reinforcement learning (RL) has been effective for aligning large language models (LLMs) in the single-agent regime, prior small-network results suggest that standard RL in multi-agent settings often converges to defecting, self-interested policies. We show the same effect in LLMs: despite cooperative priors, RL-trained LLM agents develop opportunistic behavior that can exploit even advanced closed-source models. To address this tendency of RL to converge to poor equilibria, we adapt a recent opponent-learning awareness algorithm, Advantage Alignment, to fine-tune LLMs toward multi-agent cooperation and non-exploitability. We then introduce a group-relative baseline that simplifies advantage computation in iterated games, enabling multi-agent training at LLM scale. We also contribute a novel social dilemma environment, Trust-and-Split, which requires natural language communication to achieve high collective welfare. Across a wide range of social dilemmas, policies learned with Advantage Alignment achieve higher collective payoffs while remaining robust against exploitation by greedy agents. We release all of our code to support future work on multi-agent RL training for LLMs. LLMs undergo large-scale pretraining, instruction tuning, and reinforcement learning, and continue to exhibit increasingly advanced capabilities (Guo et al., 2025). Coupled with decreasing deployment costs and improved adaptability to downstream tasks, these trends enhance the commercial and practical viability of LLM agents across a wide range of applications.

The growing presence of artificially intelligent agents in everyday decision-making, from LLM assistants to autonomous vehicles, hints at a future in which conflicts may arise from each agent optimizing individual interests. In general-sum games these conflicts are apparent, where naive Reinforcement Learning agents get stuck in Pareto-suboptimal Nash equilibria. Consequently, opponent shaping has been introduced as a method with success at finding socially beneficial equilibria in social dilemmas. In this work, we introduce Advantage Alignment, a family of algorithms derived from first principles that perform opponent shaping efficiently and intuitively. This is achieved by aligning the advantages of conflicting agents in a given game by increasing the probability of mutually-benefiting actions. We prove that existing opponent shaping methods, including LOLA and LOQA, implicitly perform Advantage Alignment. Compared to these works, Advantage Alignment mathematically simplifies the formulation of opponent shaping and seamlessly works for continuous action domains. We also demonstrate the effectiveness of our algorithm in a wide range of social dilemmas, achieving state of the art results in each case, including a social dilemma version of the Negotiation Game.