这篇论文让AI玩三方狼人杀，发现GPT-4.1狼人总犯傻投票出Jester，而DeepSeek学会了装可疑又不露馅。想看看AI怎么玩心眼？读它。
研究者将狼人杀游戏扩展为三方博弈，加入Jester角色，其获胜条件是被投票出局，与狼人和村民的效用函数完全相反。在GPT-4.1、DeepSeek-V3.1和Llama-3.3-70B上进行了60局测试，Jester胜率达60-70%，狼人胜率从未超过20%。GPT-4.1控制的狼人常在第一天投票出Jester，构成严格的自毁行为。自学习机制对DeepSeek和Llama有帮助，但对GPT-4.1有害，且成本落在村民而非狼人身上。只有DeepSeek学会了看起来可疑但不故意可疑的微妙策略，在自循环中获益最大。
Triadic Werewolf: A Jester Role for Multi-Hop Theory of Mind in LLMs
Theory-of-mind evaluations of large language models typically use dyadic social-deduction games, where every observable cue points to a single hidden side, so a model with strong language priors can score well without ever simulating opponents' incentives. We extend the Werewolf game with a Jester, a third faction whose utility on peer suspicion is inverted because it wins by being voted out, so optimal play requires reasoning across three opposing utility functions. Across 60 games on GPT-4.1, DeepSeek-V3.1, and Llama-3.3-70B with Jester self-learning on and off, the Jester wins 60-70% of games while Werewolves never exceed 20%, and GPT-4.1 wolves vote the Jester out on day 1 in 60-70% of games, a strictly self-defeating action. Self-learning helps DeepSeek and Llama but hurts GPT-4.1, with the cost landing on Villagers rather than Werewolves. Only DeepSeek learns the subtle strategy of looking suspicious without looking intentionally suspicious, and it gains the most from the loop. Triadic incentive structure exposes a layer of multi-agent reasoning that dyadic deduction games leave invisible.