Mitigating LLM-based p-Hacking by Preregistering for the Next LLM
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to generate, classify, and annotate data whose outputs feed downstream hypothesis tests. However, LLM-based research is easy to p-hack: a researcher can tune the prompts, decoding parameters, or output format until a desired result is reached. We propose a protocol to mitigate p-hacking in LLM-based research: preregistering the experiment and eligible models, and then running it on the first eligible LLM that is released after the preregistration. The researcher finalizes the procedure on current models, preregisters the analysis plan together with a set of eligible future models, and runs the confirmatory analysis on the first eligible model released afterward. Because this model does not exist at commitment time, it cannot be hacked against; furthermore, configurations that hack one model frequently do not transfer to the next. We evaluate the protocol on two tasks whose true values are known. Across 20 models from four providers and 11 LLM-analysis configurations, the protocol would have blocked successful transfer of the p-hack in 73.9% and 72.7% of cases in the two tasks. Additional analyses reveal that mitigation remains substantial under several stress tests. Finally, putting money where our mouth is, we followed our own protocol and preregistered our experiment. The preregistered experiment confirmed the protocol's effectiveness: out of the 7 configurations that hacked the prior model, the hacking failed to carry over in 6 configurations on the first eligible model released afterward.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 26 of its 53 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 Jun 2026.
Builds on
26 of 53 references.
References · 26
- 2022Out of One, Many: Using Language Models to Simulate Human Samplescited by 752
- 2025Agent Laboratory: Using LLM Agents as Research Assistantscited by 425
- 2025The AI Scientist-v2: Workshop-Level Automated Scientific Discovery via Agentic Tree Searchcited by 422
- 2023Can Large Language Models Transform Computational Social Science?cited by 250
- 2023Prediction-Powered Inferencecited by 220
- 2021Causal Inference in Natural Language Processing: Estimation, Prediction, Interpretation and Beyondcited by 178
- 2024The Effect of Sampling Temperature on Problem Solving in Large Language Modelscited by 170
- 2026Towards End-to-End Automation of AI Researchcited by 159
- 2025Language Model Fine-Tuning on Scaled Survey Data for Predicting Distributions of Public Opinionscited by 66
- 2025Large Language Model Hacking: Quantifying the Hidden Risks of Using LLMs for Text Annotationcited by 50
- 2024Can Unconfident LLM Annotations Be Used for Confident Conclusions?cited by 49
- 2023Using Imperfect Surrogates for Downstream Inference: Design-based Supervised Learning for Social Science Applications of Large Language Modelscited by 39
14 more
- 2025Finetuning LLMs for Human Behavior Prediction in Social Science Experimentscited by 39
- 2025Flaw or Artifact? Rethinking Prompt Sensitivity in Evaluating LLMscited by 30
- 2025The More You Automate, the Less You See: Hidden Pitfalls of AI Scientist Systemscited by 29
- 2026This human study did not involve human subjects: Validating LLM simulations as behavioral evidencecited by 29
- 2025Towards LLMs Robustness to Changes in Prompt Format Stylescited by 21
- 2025Detecting LLM-Generated Peer Reviewscited by 20
- 2025Valid Survey Simulations with Limited Human Data: The Roles of Prompting, Fine-Tuning, and Rectificationcited by 18
- 2025An Empirical Study of LLM Reasoning Ability Under Strict Output Length Constraintcited by 17
- 2024Prompt Design Matters for Computational Social Science Tasks but in Unpredictable Wayscited by 16
- 2024Usefulness of LLMs as an Author Checklist Assistant for Scientific Papers: NeurIPS'24 Experimentcited by 16
- 2025Doubly-Robust LLM-as-a-Judge: Externally Valid Estimation with Imperfect Personascited by 8
- 2026Stop Drawing Scientific Claims from LLM Social Simulations Without Robustness Auditscited by 8
- 2024A Randomized Controlled Trial on Anonymizing Reviewers to Each Other in Peer Review Discussionscited by 6
- 2026Policies Permitting LLM Use for Polishing Peer Reviews Are Currently Not Enforceablecited by 6
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.
2 papers.