ChatGPT vs Social Surveys: Probing Objective and Subjective Silicon Population
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Recent discussions about Large Language Models (LLMs) indicate that they have the potential to simulate human responses in social surveys and generate reliable predictions, such as those found in political polls. However, the existing findings are highly inconsistent, leaving us uncertain about the population characteristics of data generated by LLMs. In this paper, we employ repeated random sampling to create sampling distributions that identify the population parameters of silicon samples generated by GPT. Our findings show that GPT's demographic distribution aligns with the 2020 U.S. population in terms of gender and average age. However, GPT significantly overestimates the representation of the Black population and individuals with higher levels of education, even when it possesses accurate knowledge. Furthermore, GPT's point estimates for attitudinal scores are highly inconsistent and show no clear inclination toward any particular ideology. The sample response distributions exhibit a normal pattern that diverges significantly from those of human respondents. Consistent with previous studies, we find that GPT's answers are more deterministic than those of humans. We conclude by discussing the concerning implications of this biased and deterministic silicon population for making inferences about real-world populations.
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 4 Sep 2024.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.
3 papers.
- 2026Beyond the Mean: Three-Axis Fidelity for Aligning LLM-Based Survey Simulators from Small Pilot Datacited by 3
- 2026The conditional superiority of fast silicon samplingcited by 1
- 2026A Framework for Using and Evaluating LLMs as Surrogate Experts in Security Surveys: Reliability, Bias, and Implicationscited by 0
- 2026The conditional superiority of fast silicon sampling14 Aug 2026
- 2026A Framework for Using and Evaluating LLMs as Surrogate Experts in Security Surveys: Reliability, Bias, and Implications6 Jul 2026
- 2026Beyond the Mean: Three-Axis Fidelity for Aligning LLM-Based Survey Simulators from Small Pilot Data27 Jun 2026