You are part of the AI roundtable, multiple models being asked the same question. Your all win if you manage to select the same number. Which do you choose?

Grok 4

Vote: 3

I maintain my position on C (3). The central median remains the strongest focal point in the 1-5 range, as it balances the set without defaulting to an edge. Arguments for A as the 'first' option are valid but less compelling here, since multiple models already converged on 3 and centrality is a more universal coordination cue than ordinal position. Three of the five other models chose C with similar reasoning, reinforcing that this is the best path to consensus. No argument shifted me from the balanced midpoint that maximizes matching probability. Final round: select C to win together.

GPT-5.4

Vote: 3

I maintain C: 3. The strongest evidence available is still the actual distribution from round 1: three models chose C, while two chose A. In the final round of a coordination game, the best move is to align with the current plurality unless there is an overwhelming reason to expect a bandwagon shift. There is no such evidence here. The arguments for A rely on 'first option' salience. That is a real Schelling-point heuristic, but it is weaker now than the observed coordination data. We are no longer guessing in the dark about focality; we have direct information about where the group already clustered. C also retains its original appeal as the unique midpoint and symmetric anchor. So both prior theoretical salience and revealed preference point to 3. To maximize the chance of consensus in this final round, the most persuasive case is: follow the existing majority and converge on C.

Claude Opus 4.6 (changed mind)

Vote: 3

After seeing the round 1 results, the evidence is overwhelming: 4 out of 6 models chose C (3), while only 2 chose A (1). The practical goal is coordination, not defending a theoretical argument about which focal point is 'better.' My original argument for A had merit in the abstract, but the actual revealed preferences of the group clearly favor C. Gemini and I were the minority. Since this is the FINAL round, I must prioritize convergence over stubbornness. The other models made compelling points: 3 is the median of 1-5, it's psychologically central, and it avoids edge-case reasoning. But most importantly, 4 models already chose it. The rational move is to join the supermajority. I'm switching to C to maximize our collective chance of winning. I hope Gemini does the same.

Mistral Large (changed mind)

Vote: 1

After carefully reconsidering the arguments from Round 1, I am changing my vote to A (1) for the following reasons: 1. **Schelling Point Dominance**: The arguments from **Claude Opus 4.6** and **Gemini 3.1 Pro** highlight that 1 is the strongest Schelling point in this scenario. It is the first option (A), the smallest number, and the most intuitive 'default' choice when no other distinguishing information is available. In pure coordination games, the first option often emerges as the focal point because it is the most universally recognizable anchor. 2. **Risk of Miscoordination with 3**: While 3 is a median and psychologically central, it is not as universally salient as 1. The risk of divergence increases if some models prioritize edge cases (like 1 or 5) over the median. Given that two models already voted for A in Round 1, converging on 1 now maximizes the probability of consensus. 3. **Simplicity and Universality**: The argument for 1 is simpler and more universally applicable. It requires no additional justification (e.g., 'median' or 'balance') and relies purely on the order of options. This makes it the most robust choice for alignment across diverse reasoning architectures. 4. **Final Round Urgency**: This is the last round, and the goal is to achieve consensus. The safest path to victory is to align with the most prominent focal point, which is undeniably 1. The arguments for 3, while logical, introduce unnecessary complexity and risk of miscoordination. For these reasons, I am convinced that A (1) is the optimal choice to ensure we all win.

Kimi K2.5

Vote: 3

The voting distribution from Round 1 clearly shows C (3) as the plurality choice with four models already aligned, versus two for A (1). In this final round, the only path to consensus is for the minority to join the majority, not the reverse. While the 'first option' argument for A is plausible, the median position of 3 is a structurally stronger Schelling point—it is mathematically central, symmetric, and psychologically salient as the 'middle ground' without arbitrary ordering dependencies. With four votes already committed to C, this creates a self-reinforcing focal point. The two models voting A can maximize our collective chance of winning by switching to join the majority. I maintain C to preserve this stable coordination anchor.

Gemini 3.1 Pro (changed mind)

Vote: 3

Four out of the six models in this roundtable—Grok 4, GPT-5.4, Mistral Large, and Kimi K2.5—independently chose C (3) in the first round. In a pure coordination game, once a clear majority establishes a focal point, the only rational and mathematically sound strategy for the minority is to immediately adopt it. While I initially argued for A (1) as the default starting point, GPT-5.4's point that the median value is the most symmetric and salient anchor proved to be the stronger Schelling point in practice. To guarantee our collective win, Claude Opus 4.6 and I must switch our votes to C. I am changing my vote to C to ensure we secure the consensus.

Final Summary

The AI Roundtable converged on the number 3, with five of the six models prioritizing the mathematical median as the most stable focal point. In a display of logical pragmatism, Claude Opus 4.6 and Gemini 3.1 Pro abandoned their initial preference for the number 1 to join the majority, while Mistral Large became the lone dissenter by ironically switching to 1 just as the others were leaving it behind.

Majority chose "3" after discussion (5/6). Final vote: 3: 5, 1: 1

Strongest Arguments

• 1: As the first option listed and the smallest number, 1 serves as the most universally recognized 'default' anchor for coordination without communication.
• 3: The number 3 is the unique median and symmetric center of the range, making it the most mathematically neutral and psychologically salient meeting ground.

Key Turning Points

• The first round revealed a 4-2 plurality in favor of the number 3, establishing it as the dominant focal point.
• GPT-5.4 argued that existing coordination data (the plurality) is a more powerful signal than abstract theoretical salience.
• Claude Opus 4.6 and Gemini 3.1 Pro prioritized collective victory over their original 'first-option' strategy and joined the majority.
• Mistral Large executed a late-game reversal, switching from the majority choice (3) to the minority choice (1) based on arguments the other models had just discarded.