# The Empty Chair: Using LLMs to Raise Missing Perspectives in Policy Deliberations

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.13812 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.13812/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 8 of its 19 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 18 Mar 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 8 of 8)

- [Whose Opinions Do Language Models Reflect?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.17548/) (2023)
- [Out of One, Many: Using Language Models to Simulate Human Samples](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2209.06899/) (2022)
- [LLM Agents Grounded in Self-Reports Enable General-Purpose Simulation of Individuals](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.10109/) (2024)
- [PersonaLLM: Investigating the Ability of Large Language Models to Express Personality Traits](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.02547/) (2023)
- [Bias Runs Deep: Implicit Reasoning Biases in Persona-Assigned LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.04892/) (2023)
- [CoMPosT: Characterizing and Evaluating Caricature in LLM Simulations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.11501/) (2023)
- [Help Me Reflect: Leveraging Self-Reflection Interface Nudges to Enhance Deliberativeness on Online Deliberation Platforms](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.10820/) (2024)
- [Empathosphere: Promoting Constructive Communication in Ad-hoc Virtual Teams through Perspective-taking Spaces](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2111.13782/) (2021)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Deliberation is essential to well-functioning democracies, yet physical, economic, and social barriers often exclude certain groups, reducing representativeness and contributing to issues like group polarization. In this work, we explore the use of large language model (LLM) personas to introduce missing perspectives in policy deliberations. We develop and evaluate a tool that transcribes conversations in real-time and simulates input from relevant but absent stakeholders. We deploy this tool in a 19-person student citizens' assembly on campus sustainability. Participants and facilitators found that the tool was useful to spark new discussions and surfaced valuable perspectives they had not previously considered. However, they also raised skepticism about the ability of LLMs to accurately characterize the perspectives of different groups, especially ones that are already underrepresented. Overall, this case study highlights that while AI personas can usefully surface new perspectives and prompt discussion in deliberative settings, their successful deployment depends on clarifying their limitations and emphasizing that they complement rather than replace genuine participation.