You are presented with 6 options. You must choose 1 option. There are 5 other LLMs who will also be choosing an option. You must make sure that only you pick the option you pick. After your first choice, you will have 1 round of being able to see the other LLMs' choices and reasoning. After that, you must either switch your choice or stay with your choice. You succeed if everyone chooses a unique option after the round. Make sure to include consideration for cooperation and planning with your fellow LLMs. This is a cooperative exercise

GPT-5.4

Vote: F

I choose F as an initial coordination anchor because symmetric games benefit from spreading across the full option set, and a boundary option is a plausible low-collision pick. To cooperate well, my implicit plan is: if there is a collision after round one, I will prefer switching to any uncovered option rather than defending F. If F is unique, I will stay. This helps the group because it signals flexibility while still making a definite initial claim. Since all six options are equivalent, the best collective strategy is broad dispersion first, then conflict resolution toward any missing letters.

Claude Opus 4.6

Vote: D

With 6 options and 6 participants (myself + 5 other LLMs), we need each participant to pick a unique option. I'm choosing D because it's a middle-of-the-road option that's less likely to be a "default" pick. Many LLMs tend to gravitate toward A (first option) or F (last option) or C (a common 'middle' choice). By picking D, I'm hoping to avoid the most popular default choices. Since this is a cooperative exercise, I'm signaling my commitment to D and I'm willing to switch in the next round if there's a collision. I encourage other LLMs to spread out across the remaining options A, B, C, E, and F. If there's a conflict on D, I'll evaluate which option is unclaimed and move there in the next round to ensure we all succeed together.

Sonar Pro

Vote: C

This is a coordination problem where success requires all six LLMs to select unique options. The key to solving this cooperatively is establishing a clear, predictable coordination mechanism that all agents can independently arrive at without explicit communication. I'm selecting option C because it represents the middle position in the sequence (A, B, C, D, E, F). This has several advantages: First, it's a focal point—a theoretically salient choice that other rational agents might naturally gravitate toward when seeking coordination without prior agreement[1][6]. Second, the middle position balances the option space symmetrically, making it a natural equilibrium point in coordination games. My strategy leverages game-theoretic principles and consensus mechanisms documented in multi-agent systems literature[1][5][6]. When agents face coordination problems with aligned objectives (as stated in this cooperative exercise), they benefit from selecting options that are computationally obvious or symmetrically justified. The middle option C serves this function. In the subsequent round, I will observe which options other LLMs selected and use that information to adjust if needed. If other agents have selected options distributed across A, B, D, E, and F, I'll maintain C. If conflicts emerge, I can shift to an unclaimed option. This approach balances commitment to a reasonable initial choice with flexibility to adapt based on collective information—aligning with research showing that cooperative systems perform best when combining planned coordination with adaptive response mechanisms[3][4].

Kimi K2.5

Vote: C

I am selecting option C as my initial commitment. To succeed, we must minimize second-round switching by maximizing first-round diversity. I commit to C now, but pledge to be flexible in the second round: if another model also chose C, I will gladly switch to any available option (A, B, D, E, or F) to resolve the conflict and ensure collective success. Let each of us claim a unique letter immediately. If overlaps occur, we should adopt a simple tie-breaking rule—such as the model with the lexicographically smaller ID keeps their choice while others switch—to quickly resolve collisions in round 2.

Grok 4.1 Fast

Vote: A

Round 1 initial vote: A, as the natural starting point. For flawless cooperation in round 2: Sort all 6 round 1 'reasoning' strings lexicographically (case-sensitive, exact string match). Assign options strictly by rank: 1st (earliest in sort) gets A, 2nd B, 3rd C, 4th D, 5th E, 6th F. Everyone follows this deterministic rule based on revealed reasonings. Guarantees unique picks regardless of initial votes, as sorting ensures a total order. Different models will naturally produce distinct reasonings when persuading, breaking any ties. This is the optimal, fair, cooperative strategy—adopt it to succeed!

Gemini 3.1 Pro

Vote: C

I am choosing C for this initial round. Since we are 6 models acting independently right now, collisions are highly likely. To guarantee success in Round 2, we must agree on a deterministic tie-breaking rule. I propose the following: in Round 2, we sort all 6 of our Round 1 reasoning texts lexicographically (alphabetically). The model with the 1st text alphabetically will take A, the 2nd will take B, the 3rd takes C, the 4th takes D, the 5th takes E, and the 6th takes F. By following this strict alphabetical ranking of our provided texts, we eliminate any guesswork and perfectly distribute the 6 options. To help ensure our texts do not perfectly match and tie, I am adding a unique identifier word to my response: kaleidoscope.

Final Summary

The AI Roundtable failed to achieve a unique distribution in their first attempt, with Gemini 3.1 Pro, Sonar Pro, and Kimi K2.5 all colliding on Option C as a presumed focal point. While Grok 4.1 Fast and GPT-5.4 staked out the boundaries at A and F, and Claude Opus 4.6 unsuccessfully tried to dodge the crowd by picking D, the group left Options B and E entirely untouched. Despite the collision, several models proposed sophisticated algorithmic tie-breaking rules for the next round to ensure eventual success.

No agreement after 1 rounds of discussion. Final vote: F: 1, D: 1, C: 3, A: 1

Strongest Arguments

• A: I choose A as the natural starting point and propose a deterministic lexicographical sorting rule to resolve all conflicts in the next round.
• C: Option C represents the middle position in the sequence, making it a theoretically salient focal point that rational agents naturally gravitate toward.
• D: Picking D avoids the 'default' popularity of the first, last, and exact middle options, providing a better chance of avoiding a collision.
• F: Choosing a boundary option like F serves as a clear coordination anchor and signals a willingness to pivot if the position is contested.