Calibrating the Instrument: Controllability of an LLM-Driven Synthetic Population
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Social simulation and multi-agent debate
Abstract (arXiv)
Generative Synthetic Populations (GSP) -- the convergence of population synthesis, agent-based modelling, and LLM agents -- are attracting growing interest for urban simulation and institutional communication research. Before any GSP instrument is used on a real population, a more basic question must be answered: does it respond to stimuli of known valence in an ordered, replicable, group-structured way? We call this controllability. We ask not whether a synthetic population tracks humans, but whether it tracks itself: whether the latent structure we impose on it is recovered in its own responses. This internal-validity question is logically prior to any claim about external validity, just as characterising an instrument's response function must precede using it to test a theory. We report SIVE (Synthetic Instrument Validation Experiment): a fictional municipality (Montelago) with 120 synthetic personas of known latent structure, exposed to seven conditions spanning strongly positive to strongly negative institutional communications about a water network. Seven pre-registered criteria, evaluated across a temperature sweep, jointly assess fidelity, stability, noise floor, specificity, sensitivity, and ordering. All seven pass at every temperature. A central finding turns a calibration failure into a diagnostic success: a message designed as "weakly positive" was identified by the instrument as functionally negative, traced to unresolved problems, uncertainty, and institutional passivity in its text; a redesigned version restored the expected ordering and interacts with agents' latent trust in unanticipated ways. A noise sub-experiment shows the instrument's intrinsic noise is roughly half the cross-agent estimate and stable across temperatures. Individual trajectories reveal coherent micro-dynamics that summary statistics obscure. Full data are available via an interactive explorer.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Social simulation and multi-agent debate, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. First posted on arXiv 1 Jul 2026.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Distribution-First Population Simulation: Collapse, Calibration, and Recall in Non-WEIRD LLM Persona Modeling
- 2026GenWorld: Empirically Grounded Urban Simulation Infrastructure for Scalable LLM-Agent Studies
- 2026Empirical Grounding Improves the Realism of LLM Agents Simulating Human Behavior During Disruptions
- 2026Stop Drawing Scientific Claims from LLM Social Simulations Without Robustness Audits
- 2025Are LLM Agents Behaviorally Coherent? Latent Profiles for Social Simulation
- 2026Poor Man's Agentic Modeling: Simulating Large LLM-Agent Societies on a Laptop
- 2026Population Physics, Population Problems: Safety and Emergence in LLM Societies
- 2025Do Large Language Models Solve the Problems of Agent-Based Modeling? A Critical Review of Generative Social Simulations