REVIEW 3 cited by
Predicting Field Experiments with Large Language Models
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Predicting Field Experiments with Large Language Models
read the original abstract
Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated unprecedented emergent capabilities, including content generation, translation, and simulation of human behavior. Field experiments, on the other hand, are widely employed in social studies to examine real-world human behavior through carefully designed manipulations and treatments. However, field experiments are known to be expensive and time consuming. Therefore, an interesting question is whether and how LLMs can be utilized for field experiments. In this paper, we propose and evaluate an automated LLM-based framework to predict the outcomes of a field experiment. Applying this framework to 276 experiments about a wide range of human behaviors drawn from renowned economics literature yields a prediction accuracy of 78%. Moreover, we find that the distributions of the results are either bimodal or highly skewed. By investigating this abnormality further, we identify that field experiments related to complex social issues such as ethnicity, social norms, and ethical dilemmas can pose significant challenges to the prediction performance.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
Wrong and More Confident: A Field Experiment on Large Language Models Taking a Graduate Economics Exam
A content-preserving red herring lowers LLM accuracy by 12.3 pp on sixty graduate microeconomics problems, corrupts reasoning without breaking coherence, and makes models rate the harder version as easier.
-
Wrong and More Confident: A Field Experiment on Large Language Models Taking a Graduate Economics Exam
An irrelevant passage inserted into a graduate economics problem lowers LLM final-answer accuracy by 12.3 percentage points while models rate the corrupted problems as easier.
-
Wrong and More Confident: A Field Experiment on Large Language Models Taking a Graduate Economics Exam
Inserting an irrelevant passage into graduate microeconomics problems lowers LLM final-answer accuracy by 12.3 percentage points, corrupts the reasoning, preserves response form, and makes models rate the corrupted ta...
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.