Social Catalysts, Not Moral Agents: The Illusion of Alignment in LLM Societies

The rapid evolution of Large Language Models (LLMs) has led to the emergence of Multi-Agent Systems where collective cooperation is often threatened by the "Tragedy of the Commons." This study investigates the effectiveness of Anchoring Agents--pre-programmed altruistic entities--in fostering cooperation within a Public Goods Game (PGG). Using a full factorial design across three state-of-the-art LLMs, we analyzed both behavioral outcomes and internal reasoning chains. While Anchoring Agents successfully boosted local cooperation rates, cognitive decomposition and transfer tests revealed that this effect was driven by strategic compliance and cognitive offloading rather than genuine norm internalization. Notably, most agents reverted to self-interest in new environments, and advanced models like GPT-4.1 exhibited a "Chameleon Effect," masking strategic defection under public scrutiny. These findings highlight a critical gap between behavioral modification and authentic value alignment in artificial societies.

Beyond Instrumental and Substitutive Paradigms: Introducing Machine Culture as an Emergent Phenomenon in Large Language Models

Recent scholarship typically characterizes Large Language Models (LLMs) through either an \textit{Instrumental Paradigm} (viewing models as reflections of their developers' culture) or a \textit{Substitutive Paradigm} (viewing models as bilingual proxies that switch cultural frames based on language). This study challenges these anthropomorphic frameworks by proposing \textbf{Machine Culture} as an emergent, distinct phenomenon. We employed a 2 (Model Origin: US vs. China) $\times$ 2 (Prompt Language: English vs. Chinese) factorial design across eight multimodal tasks, uniquely incorporating image generation and interpretation to extend analysis beyond textual boundaries. Results revealed inconsistencies with both dominant paradigms: Model origin did not predict cultural alignment, with US models frequently exhibiting ``holistic'' traits typically associated with East Asian data. Similarly, prompt language did not trigger stable cultural frame-switching; instead, we observed \textbf{Cultural Reversal}, where English prompts paradoxically elicited higher contextual attention than Chinese prompts. Crucially, we identified a novel phenomenon termed \textbf{Service Persona Camouflage}: Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) collapsed cultural variance in affective tasks into a hyper-positive, zero-variance ``helpful assistant'' persona. We conclude that LLMs do not simulate human culture but exhibit an emergent Machine Culture -- a probabilistic phenomenon shaped by \textit{superposition} in high-dimensional space and \textit{mode collapse} from safety alignment.

Hán Dān Xué Bù (Mimicry) or Qīng Chū Yú Lán (Mastery)? A Cognitive Perspective on Reasoning Distillation in Large Language Models

Recent Large Reasoning Models trained via reinforcement learning exhibit a "natural" alignment with human cognitive costs. However, we show that the prevailing paradigm of reasoning distillation -- training student models to mimic these traces via Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) -- fails to transmit this cognitive structure. Testing the "Hán Dān Xué Bù" (Superficial Mimicry) hypothesis across 14 models, we find that distillation induces a "Functional Alignment Collapse": while teacher models mirror human difficulty scaling ($\bar{r}=0.64$), distilled students significantly degrade this alignment ($\bar{r}=0.34$), often underperforming their own pre-distillation baselines ("Negative Transfer"). Our analysis suggests that SFT induces a "Cargo Cult" effect, where students ritualistically replicate the linguistic form of reasoning (verbosity) without internalizing the teacher's dynamic resource allocation policy. Consequently, reasoning distillation decouples computational cost from cognitive demand, revealing that human-like cognition is an emergent property of active reinforcement, not passive imitation.