资讯

Thinking Less to Simulate Better: Intuitive Prompting Improves LLM Agents Simulating Individual Social Media Reactions, Including Unfamiliar Content

📅 2026-09-28 ⏱️ 约 7 分钟阅读 ✍️ AI导航编辑部 🔗 arxiv.org
Thinking Less to Simulate Better: Intuitive Prompting Improves LLM Agents Simulating Individual Social Media Reactions, Including Unfamiliar Content
📝 内容摘要

Computer Science > Artificial Intelligence [Submitted on 24 Sep 2026] Title:Thinking Less to Simulate Better: Intu

📌 核心要点

  • Computer Science > Artificial Intelligence
  • [Submitted on 24 Sep 2026]
  • Current browse context:

Computer Science > Artificial Intelligence

[Submitted on 24 Sep 2026]

Title:Thinking Less to Simulate Better: Intuitive Prompting Improves LLM Agents Simulating Individual Social Media Reactions, Including Unfamiliar Content

View PDFAbstract:Platform policies are increasingly tested on artificial users, making agent fidelity important. Yet convincing fake profiles could also manipulate perceived public opinion before elections. Validation has concentrated on agreement with human behaviour and has paid little attention to whether an agent behaves in line with the profile it was given. The present study profiled eight Serbian participants through a questionnaire, a deep interview, and a written self-presentation, recorded their reactions to sixty-eight social media posts, and asked four language models to predict those reactions under five prompt conditions varying profile content and instruction style. Attitudinal content improved prediction over demographic backstories by a wide margin. Agents matched their stated profiles more closely than participants matched their own survey answers, and consistency proved unrelated to fidelity once profile information was present. Instructing models to respond intuitively and immediately rather than analytically gave the highest fidelity of any condition and cut the compression of individual differences from seven times the human level to three. The advantage held on posts about topics the questionnaire never raised, where that condition reached the highest fidelity of any setup and beat a crowd baseline by a wide margin, which suggests that agents prompted this way could serve as general-purpose simulated users rather than specialists on the topics they were profiled for. Results may bear implications for the development of language models, because intuition-based setups appear better suited to some tasks than reasoning-based ones.

Current browse context:

cs.AI

References & Citations

Loading...

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)

Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)

Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)

scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)

CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)

DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)

Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)

Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)

ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)

Demos

Recommenders and Search Tools

Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)

CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

来源arxiv.org· 本文为编辑整理,仅供参考