It is proposed that observed human response variation of a survey question is a potential explanation for the mixed performance observed so far in persona prompting and new insights are provided on the effectiveness of different attribute selection methods for LLM-based survey prediction using persona prompting.
Abstract
Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used to predict the responses of human participants in survey panels. Towards that goal, persona prompting has recently emerged as a technique to inform and align large pretrained language models. Persona prompting refers to the practice of using short textual descriptions of'personas'in prompts to steer the LLM's generations. Personas describe individuals through different attributes such as their socio-demographics, attitudes, or behaviors, with the aim of aligning LLMs to produce responses that correlate with the corresponding human responses. Yet, recent work has produced mixed and partly conflicting results of persona prompting without clear patterns of success and failure. Among the few consistent findings is that the selection of persona attributes matters, and that using more attributes does not necessarily lead to better performance. It remains unclear how different attribute selection methods perform and how to choose among them. In this paper, we propose that observed human response variation of a survey question is a potential explanation for the mixed performance observed so far. In addition, we compare the performance of persona prompting associated with different methods for selecting persona attributes. We evaluate these methods on four different (general) social surveys across two countries, six LLMs, and twenty prediction tasks per survey. Our work helps to identify when persona prompting can be expected to be useful in survey prediction tasks, and provides new insights on the effectiveness of different attribute selection methods for LLM-based survey prediction using persona prompting.
Persona conditioning is increasingly used to guide the behavior of Large Language Models (LLMs), yet the extent to which models consistently and effectively adapt to assigned identities remains unclear. In this paper, we present a systematic evaluation of persona-conditioned behavior in three open-weight LLMs: DeepSeek...
Roberto Cavicchioli, Marco Furini, Massimiliano Panarari· Proceedings of the 2026 Inte...· 0 citations
This work introduces Population Fidelity, an evaluation framework that distinguishes key conditions required for a set of LLM-generated responses to represent a population and organizes these features and provides reusable code, data, and trained models for evaluating population fidelity across substantive domains and...
Neemias B. da Silva, Martin Lukk, A. Sutani et al.· 0 citations
No overall preference is indicated between human and machine-generated summaries; however, experts with greater familiarity with the Bulletin and higher educational attainment showed a marked preference for the official summaries.
Claudia Biancotti, C. Camassa, Marco Fruzzetti et al.· 0 citations
Language models are appealing tools for research on the past. But to trust the evidence a model provides, researchers need to know whether its responses fit the period represented. Validation is challenging, because this is not a task living people ordinarily perform, and because many questions have multiple correct an...
Ted Underwood, Zi-Liang Qiu, Sarah Griebel et al.· 0 citations
It is found that a judge prompted with no demographics is not perspective-neutral: models best reproduce the judgments of White, college-educated annotators and instruction-tuning is identified as a possible source of the asymmetry.
Daniela Occhipinti, Andrea Piergentili, M. Guerini· 0 citations
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as synthetic personas representing survey respondents. Their validity as substitutes for particular respondents depends on whether they reproduce individuals'decisions. We examine what information helps synthetic respondents predict each individual's later choices, usi...
A new computational approach reveals how cells communicate to assemble into tissues. This could accelerate stem cell engineering, improve disease models, and inform therapies.
Microsoft Research Blog· microsoft.comOct 15, 2026
Zero-knowledge proofs can verify computing results without rerunning workloads or exposing sensitive data. Magnetar helps bring them into the mainstream with support for standard programming languages, major speed gains, and quantum-resistant security. The post Proof-based general-purpose computing with Magnetar appeared first on Microsoft Research.
MIT News · Artificial Intelligence· news.mit.eduSep 24, 2026