Sign inGet started
Paper · arXiv

Statistical realism is not evidence that LLMs can estimate treatment effects in social science experiments

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to simulate human responses and estimate treatment effect of interventions when real-world experiments are costly or infeasible. The treatment-effect estimates are often evaluated using statistical realism, the degree to which simulated responses reproduce properties of observed human responses, although whether realism predicts treatment-effect accuracy remains unknown. Here we test this proxy relationship by jointly measuring statistical realism and treatment-effect accuracy on the same simulated responses in a cross-national experiment with 59,508 participants from 62 countries using three LLMs. The correlation between statistical real...

AuthorsZonghan Li, Feng Ji
Primary categorycs.CY
Published2 April 2026
Last updated at source27 July 2026
cs.CYcs.AIcs.ET
Embed this entry
<iframe src="https://silytics.si/embed/item/f980a5ff-57f6-4bcd-a6f1-6fc577cbcd2c" width="420" height="190" style="border:0" loading="lazy" title="Silytics entry"></iframe>

Free, no tracking. More about feeds and embeds.

Silytics shows public metadata from arXiv and links to the original. Information may be incomplete or out of date. Last refreshed 17 October 2026. Licenses and terms of the original apply to the work itself. Not financial, legal or professional advice.