Evaluating the Efficacy of LLMs to Emulate Realistic Human Personalities
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
To enhance immersion and engagement in video games, the design of Affective Non-Player Characters (ANPCs) is a key focus for researchers and practitioners. Affective Computing frameworks improve Non-player characters (NPC) by providing personalities, emotions, and social relations. Large Language Models (LLMs) bring the promise to dynamically enhance character design when coupled with these frameworks, but further research is needed to validate the models truly represent human qualities. In this research, a comprehensive analysis investigates the capabilities of LLMs to generate content that aligns with human personality, using the Big Five and human responses from the International Personality Item Pool (IPIP) questionnaire. Our goal is to benchmark the performance of various LLMs, including frontier models and local models, against an extensive dataset comprising over 50,000 human surveys of self-reported personality tests to determine whether LLMs can replicate human-like decision-making with personality-driven prompts. A range of personality profiles were used to cluster the test results from the human survey dataset. Our methodology involved prompting LLMs with self-evaluated test items for each personality profile, comparing their outputs to human baseline responses, and evaluating the accuracy and consistency. Our findings show that some local models had 0% alignment of any personality profiles when compared to the human dataset, while the frontier models, in some cases, had 100% alignment. The results indicate that NPCs can successfully emulate human-like personality traits using LLMs, as demonstrated by benchmarking the LLM's output against human data. This foundational work serves as a methodology for game developers and researchers to test and evaluate LLMs, ensuring they accurately represent the desired human personalities and can be expanded for further validation.
Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 3 of its 26 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 21 Feb 2024.
Builds on
3 of 26 references.
References · 3
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 1; 2025: 3; 2026: 2.
6 papers.
- 2025Can LLM Agents Maintain a Persona in Discourse?cited by 15
- 2024GPT for Games: An Updated Scoping Review (2020-2024)cited by 10
- 2026PersonaArena: Dynamic Simulation for Evaluating and Enhancing Persona-Level Role-Playing in Large Language Modelscited by 3
- 2025Twenty Years of Personality Computing: Threats, Challenges and Future Directionscited by 2
- 2025Integrating Personality into Digital Humans: A Review of LLM-Driven Approaches for Virtual Realitycited by 2
- 2026Is AI Catching Up to Human Expression? Exploring Emotion, Personality, Authorship, and Linguistic Style in English and Arabic with Six Large Language Modelscited by 0
- 2026PersonaArena: Dynamic Simulation for Evaluating and Enhancing Persona-Level Role-Playing in Large Language Models16 May 2026
- 2026Is AI Catching Up to Human Expression? Exploring Emotion, Personality, Authorship, and Linguistic Style in English and Arabic with Six Large Language Models24 Mar 2026
- 2025Twenty Years of Personality Computing: Threats, Challenges and Future Directions3 Mar 2025
- 2025Integrating Personality into Digital Humans: A Review of LLM-Driven Approaches for Virtual Reality22 Feb 2025
- 2025Can LLM Agents Maintain a Persona in Discourse?17 Feb 2025
- 2024GPT for Games: An Updated Scoping Review (2020-2024)1 Nov 2024