mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Synthetic Personalities: How Well Can LLMs Mimic Individual Respondents Using Socio-Economic Microdata?

arXiv 2606.04592 ↗First posted 3 Jun 2026cs.CY cs.AI cs.HCcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

LLM-based digital twins promise to scale and accelerate market research, but most published twins are either coarse persona bots conditioned on a few demographic questions or detailed individual-level twins built on purpose-collected surveys and interview transcripts. Neither setup speaks to the operationally most relevant case for marketing practice: building detailed individual twins from the pre-existing heterogeneous panel data that firms already accumulate through CRM systems, loyalty programs, and repeat surveys. We construct detailed individual-level twins from the German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP) and evaluate them across a 3 × 5 × 2 × 2 construction-method grid that covers three open-weights LLMs, five cumulative information depths ranked by normalized Shannon entropy, two embedding methods, and two reasoning modes, scoring over 2.1 million twin responses on 500 participants and 183 held-out questions. Twin quality rises with information depth but with diminishing returns past the 75 percent entropy quartile, which acts as a cost-efficient Pareto point relative to the best-performing 100 percent cells. Switching the embedding from a narrative persona summary to a raw dialog history of past responses raises hold-out accuracy in every model-by-reasoning cell at the 100 percent depth, while an explicit thinking mode raises rank-order correlation without moving accuracy. Best-cell accuracy reaches 78.8 percent and Fisher-z correlation reaches r = 0.590 on the SOEP held-out evaluation set. The findings suggest that twin-based market research is no longer gated by data design, but by item volume, model selection, and a small set of construction-level decisions that this paper now maps.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 14 of its 39 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 Jun 2026.

Builds on

14 of 39 references.

References · 14

  1. 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,302
  2. 2024Scaling LLM Test-Time Compute Optimally can be More Effective than Scaling Model Parameterscited by 1,928
  3. 2022Out of One, Many: Using Language Models to Simulate Human Samplescited by 737
  4. 2022Using Large Language Models to Simulate Multiple Humans and Replicate Human Subject Studiescited by 506
  5. 2024LLM Agents Grounded in Self-Reports Enable General-Purpose Simulation of Individualscited by 235
  6. 2023Bias Runs Deep: Implicit Reasoning Biases in Persona-Assigned LLMscited by 191
  7. 2024The Political Preferences of LLMscited by 83
  8. 2025LLM Generated Persona is a Promise with a Catchcited by 77
  9. 2023Questioning the Survey Responses of Large Language Modelscited by 70
  10. 2024"My Answer is C": First-Token Probabilities Do Not Match Text Answers in Instruction-Tuned Language Modelscited by 66
  11. 2025Language Model Fine-Tuning on Scaled Survey Data for Predicting Distributions of Public Opinionscited by 64
  12. 2025Finetuning LLMs for Human Behavior Prediction in Social Science Experimentscited by 35
2 more
  1. 2025Beyond Demographics: Fine-tuning Large Language Models to Predict Individuals' Subjective Text Perceptionscited by 31
  2. 2024Large Language Models for Market Research: A Data-augmentation Approachcited by 18

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Synthetic Data in Marketing Research: How to Evaluate and When to Trust
  2. 2025Pay What LLM Wants: Can LLM Simulate Economics Experiment with 522 Real-human Persona?
  3. 2025Can Finetuing LLMs on Small Human Samples Increase Heterogeneity, Alignment, and Belief-Action Coherence?
  4. 2025The Sign Estimator: LLM Alignment in the Face of Choice Heterogeneity
  5. 2026Your Reviews Replicate You: LLM-Based Agents as Customer Digital Twins for Conjoint Analysis
  6. 2025Improving the Distributional Alignment of LLMs using Supervision
  7. 2026Distribution-First Population Simulation: Collapse, Calibration, and Recall in Non-WEIRD LLM Persona Modeling
  8. 2025Assessing the Human-Likeness of LLM-Driven Digital Twins in Simulating Health Care System Trust