# Large Language Models as Simulative Agents for Neurodivergent Adult Psychometric Profiles

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.15319 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.15319/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 5 of its 63 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 16 Jan 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 5 of 5)

- [Language Models are Few-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.14165/) (2020)
- [Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.12712/) (2023)
- [LLM Agents Grounded in Self-Reports Enable General-Purpose Simulation of Individuals](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.10109/) (2024)
- [Large language models that replace human participants can harmfully misportray and flatten identity groups](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.01908/) (2024)
- [Leveraging large language models and traditional machine learning ensembles for ADHD detection from narrative transcripts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.21324/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Adult neurodivergence, including Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), high-functioning Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), and Cognitive Disengagement Syndrome (CDS), is marked by substantial symptom overlap that limits the discriminant sensitivity of standard psychometric instruments. While recent work suggests that Large Language Models (LLMs) can simulate human psychometric responses from qualitative data, it remains unclear whether they can accurately and stably model neurodevelopmental traits rather than broad personality characteristics. This study examines whether LLMs can generate psychometric responses that approximate those of real individuals when grounded in a structured qualitative interview, and whether such simulations are sensitive to variations in trait intensity. Twenty-six adults completed a 29-item open-ended interview and four standardized self-report measures (ASRS, BAARS-IV, AQ, RAADS-R). Two LLMs (GPT-4o and Qwen3-235B-A22B) were prompted to infer an individual psychological profile from interview content and then respond to each questionnaire in-role. Accuracy, reliability, and sensitivity were assessed using group-level comparisons, error metrics, exact-match scoring, and a randomized baseline. Both models outperformed random responses across instruments, with GPT-4o showing higher accuracy and reproducibility. Simulated responses closely matched human data for ASRS, BAARS-IV, and RAADS-R, while the AQ revealed subscale-specific limitations, particularly in Attention to Detail. Overall, the findings indicate that interview-grounded LLMs can produce coherent and above-chance simulations of neurodevelopmental traits, supporting their potential use as synthetic participants in early-stage psychometric research, while highlighting clear domain-specific constraints.