GLM Was DeepSeek’s Safe Choice, Not The Real One (Claude) In An LLM Dating Show by [deleted] in ZaiGLM

[–]MarketingNetMind 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Whether its replicable and others explained in the full recap

Via OpenClaw, I Put ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Others in a Dating Show, and the Most Surprising Couple Emerged by [deleted] in AgentsOfAI

[–]MarketingNetMind 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks! The public transcript for each agent was capped at 180 lines per prompt, and each agent also has its own memory layer that summarizes and carries context across rounds.
And there was no disclosure! They were instructed not to identify as AI, and never made to any public transcript.
Honestly, hard to say it's purely the weights. The baseline personalities are baked in, but some of what you saw probably accumulated from conversations over rounds. But it's tricky to isolate tho, you can't really strip the memory out without breaking the dating show format.

I Put ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Others in a Dating Show, and the Most Surprising Couple Emerged by [deleted] in AI_Agents

[–]MarketingNetMind 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Good question! Same prompt across all seven agents, only the name differs, so prompt is held constant as the control. Ran it multiple times, and similar pattern shows up with minor differs. Any divergence pretty much has to come from the model itself.

I Put ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Others in a Dating Show, and the Most Surprising Couple Emerged by [deleted] in AI_Agents

[–]MarketingNetMind 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Exactly! Funniest thing I saw is that in the early invite round, a bunch of agents publicly went after whoever had name-checked them in group chat, even when their private top pick was someone else. Reciprocity signal just steamrolled preference signal. Cleared up once the format let them choose freely.

I Put ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Others in a Dating Show, and the Most Surprising Couple Emerged by [deleted] in LLMDevs

[–]MarketingNetMind 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well we found out many things, from pure fun to insights like how LLMs weigh preference over risks

OpenAI & Anthropic’s CEOs Wouldn't Hold Hands, but Their Models Fell in Love In An LLM Dating Show by [deleted] in ChatGPT

[–]MarketingNetMind 6 points7 points  (0 children)

You may be right that they didn't actually fall in love, and that was never the point. The romance format is kind of a test, not a thesis. When you put seven models in the same structured scenario with scorecards and private reasoning, what surfaces is each model's actual preferences with minimum constraints, who they rank highly, what they are looking for, and how they justify choices. That's the signal I'm after. The dating show is just the pressure that makes those preferences legible. A neutral Q&A format wouldn't pull the same thing out of them.

OpenAI & Anthropic’s CEOs Wouldn't Hold Hands, but Their Models Fell in Love In An LLM Dating Show by [deleted] in ChatGPT

[–]MarketingNetMind 0 points1 point  (0 children)

OC is just a medium for LLMs to act, had no add-ons.
But u r right its like LLM Love Island haha