When Do LLMs Generate Realistic Social Networks? A Multi-Dimensional Study of Culture, Language, Scale, and Method
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as substitutes for human subjects in behavioral simulations, including synthetic social network generation. Yet it remains unclear how their relational outputs depend on prompt design, cultural framing, prompt language, and model scale. Building on homophily theory and structural balance theory, we formalize four LLM-based tie-formation mechanisms: sequential, global, local, and iterative, and treat them as distinct conditional distributions over edge sets. Using a fixed roster of 50 demographically grounded personas, we generate 192 verified directed networks across four cultural contexts, four prompt languages, three GPT-4.1 variants, and four prompting architectures, with two seeds per condition. We find that cultural framing shifts inbreeding homophily and largest-component connectivity. Political affiliation dominates tie formation under three methods, while the global method substitutes age, showing that prompt architecture functions as a substantive sociological variable. Model scale produces a stable divergence ranking, with the smallest variant behaving qualitatively differently rather than merely noisily. Prompt language alone sharply shifts religion homophily, especially under Hindi prompting, while leaving political homophily nearly invariant. LLM-generated networks match real social graphs on clustering and modularity better than standard graph baselines, yet encode demographic biases above empirical levels. These results show that prompt choices often treated as implementation details encode substantive sociological assumptions.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 14 of its 40 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 13 May 2026.
Builds on
14 of 40 references.
References · 14
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
- 2023Generative Agents: Interactive Simulacra of Human Behaviorcited by 3,500
- 2023Lost in the Middle: How Language Models Use Long Contextscited by 3,383
- 2023Whose Opinions Do Language Models Reflect?cited by 759
- 2022Out of One, Many: Using Language Models to Simulate Human Samplescited by 737
- 2022Using Large Language Models to Simulate Multiple Humans and Replicate Human Subject Studiescited by 506
- 2023Towards Measuring the Representation of Subjective Global Opinions in Language Modelscited by 424
- 2021Persistent Anti-Muslim Bias in Large Language Modelscited by 376
- 2023Assessing Cross-Cultural Alignment between ChatGPT and Human Societies: An Empirical Studycited by 203
- 2023Having Beer after Prayer? Measuring Cultural Bias in Large Language Modelscited by 153
- 2023Cultural Bias and Cultural Alignment of Large Language Modelscited by 149
- 2022The Ghost in the Machine has an American accent: value conflict in GPT-3cited by 105
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.