arXiv:2607. 26348v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as synthetic users, stand-ins for human respondents whose simulated answers feed product, policy, and market decisions.
The paper discusses the use of synthetic data in marketing research, arguing that the key question is not whether synthetic respondents work, but when they do. It categorizes synthetic data into three types—ungrounded LLM responses, segment-level personas, and individual-level digital twins—and maps each to the decisions they can support. The authors also propose a taxonomy of accuracy measures, highlight the forgotten question problem, and introduce an ex‑ante answerability diagnostic based on R² to improve twin-human correlation.
arXiv:2609.15849v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Can LLMs reason through new information like humans, or do they merely retrieve cached opinions? This is critical for silicon sampling, where LLM per...
arXiv:2607. 11269v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Decision support systems (DSS) increasingly run retention what-if analysis on synthetic customer populations, because privacy constraints preclude unrestricted use of real data.
arXiv:2607. 20787v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: For two decades, the standard remedy for class-imbalanced learning has been to fabricate synthetic minority examples, and the standard evidence of their validity has been a check that cannot fail: synthetic points are scored against the very data that generated them.
The study audits demographic bias across four deep knowledge tracing architectures—DKT, DKVMN, SAKT, and AKT—using two large public datasets (Eedi and OULAD). It finds that bias is context‑dependent: socioeconomic bias is significant on Eedi, while gender bias appears on OULAD for most models. The most accurate model, AKT, also exhibits the greatest bias, and standard mitigation techniques such as reweighting and adversarial debiasing fail to reduce bias without sacrificing accuracy.
The study evaluates a Korean synthetic persona panel (NVIDIA Nemotron‑Personas‑Korea) conditioned on Gemini 3.5 Flash and EXAONE against the KISDI Korea Media Panel Survey. Across eight digital‑AI service‑use indicators and eight innovativeness constructs, the panels achieved mean absolute errors of 15–19 pp, with segment‑level errors up to 52.4 pp and correlation coefficients between 0.69 and 0.90. Holdout calibration reduced sex‑by‑age cell errors but still lagged behind direct real‑data estimation, indicating that synthetic panels are useful diagnostically but not as survey substitutes.
arXiv:2604. 22891v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: LLM-as-a-Judge has become a dominant approach in automated evaluation systems, playing critical roles in model alignment, leaderboard construction, quality control, and so on.
arXiv:2608.22483v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) increasingly support decision-making in high-stakes domains, but they often hallucinate and express confidence that is mis...
The paper argues that verbalized confidence—once viewed as overconfident and coarse—has become the preferred soft‑scoring method for LLM‑as‑a‑Judge on top‑tier proprietary models released after 2025. Experiments on SummEval, AggreFact, and HelpSteer2 across up to 18 LLMs show that log‑probabilities are no longer the best signal, and that adding an overconfidence advisory and self‑debate further improves calibration and robustness. The authors note that these enhancements incur little accuracy loss on post‑2025 models but do affect pre‑2025 ones, highlighting a compatibility shift in how confidence should be measured.
arXiv:2607. 18310v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Synthetic-population tools increasingly run every individual as an independent large language model (LLM) agent.
arXiv:2608.18768v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large language models are widely used to simulate survey respondents, yet their outputs are homogeneous and unfaithful to real inter-group differen...