Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
InterveneBench is introduced as a new benchmark to evaluate LLMs' ability to perform intervention-centered research design reasoning in realistic social settings, using 744 peer-reviewed social science studies. Experiments reveal that current LLMs struggle with this task, which requires reasoning about policy interventions and identification assumptions without predefined causal graphs. To improve performance, the authors propose a multi-agent framework called STRIDES, which significantly outperforms existing reasoning models on InterveneBench.
LLMs fall short when designing causal studies for real-world policy interventions, highlighting a critical gap in their reasoning abilities for social science applications.
Causal inference in social science relies on end-to-end, intervention-centered research-design reasoning grounded in real-world policy interventions, but current benchmarks fail to evaluate this capability of large language models (LLMs). We present InterveneBench, a benchmark designed to assess such reasoning in realistic social settings. Each instance in InterveneBench is derived from an empirical social science study and requires models to reason about policy interventions and identification assumptions without access to predefined causal graphs or structural equations. InterveneBench comprises 744 peer-reviewed studies across diverse policy domains. Experimental results show that state-of-the-art LLMs struggle under this setting. To address this limitation, we further propose a multi-agent framework, STRIDES. It achieves significant performance improvements over state-of-the-art reasoning models. Our code and data are available at https://github.com/Sii-yuning/STRIDES.
