ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2026
Evaluating the statistical realism of LLM-generated social science data.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Persona-prompted LLM agents achieve modest but genuine prediction of human social media reactions.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Large language models (LLMs) hold great promise for generating social science data, potentially expanding the methodological toolkit of quantitative social research. Prior studies have primarily focused on individual-level predictability or behavioral plausibility of LLM-generated data. We propose a framework for assessing the validity of LLM-generated data by returning to the foundational principles of survey research in the social sciences. Just as surveys based on representative samples yield statistics that approximate the corresponding statistical moments of the target population, assessment should center on the ability of LLM-generated data to reproduce real-world, population-level statistical patterns. We introduce SSDataBench, a systematic benchmark designed to evaluate population-level statistical realism in LLM-generated social science data. The benchmark assesses five types of statistical patterns central to social research: univariate distributions, bivariate associations, multivariate outcome predictions, life event sequence distributions, and associations between life event sequences and covariates. We illustrate SSDataBench using four longitudinal datasets and three cross-sectional datasets spanning six major social domains: demographics, socioeconomic status, marriage, health, abilities, and attitudes. Our study reveals representational limitations in current LLMs under sparse conditioning settings, manifested in a pronounced tendency to compress real-world heterogeneity into simplified typological structures. Finally, we outline a roadmap toward improved statistical realism and report preliminary results indicating that domain-specific training can enhance population-level realism.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.