Consequential Behaviour and Representational Fairness in the Validation of Synthetic Research
Read the original on arXiv Computation and Language →Researchers use synthetic survey respondents generated by large language models as substitutes for human samples, but current validation methods often compare them to human surveys in ways that may not reflect real-world consequential behaviour. The authors propose a new validation framework that requires explicit statements of how well synthetic data correspond to human behaviour, specifies which diagnostics are addressed, and demands subgroup-level validity claims to avoid misrepresentation. The framework operationalises distributional, procedural, and recognition justice dimensions and introduces within-persona counterfactual experiments, illustrated with a case study on electric vehicle charging tariffs and concluded with a reporting checklist for researchers.
Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv Computation and Language.