Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
To systematically structure the fragmented literature on the social implications of AI, the authors mapped 47,719 publications and a curated 198-paper evaluation corpus using sentence embeddings, K-means clustering, and structural topic modeling. Establishing a rigorous taxonomy across model behavior, multi-agent systems, and human-AI dynamics is critical as LLM deployment increasingly intersects with human behavioral science and institutional decision-making. The analysis reveals three stable domains鈥擫LM as Social Minds, LLM Societies, and LLM-Human Interactions鈥攗ncovering a stark disciplinary divide where top AI conferences prioritize model psychology and agent dynamics (66.37% of top citations), while broader journal venues overwhelmingly focus on human-facing impacts (76.81%).
Despite 78% of the broader literature fixating on human-computer interaction, elite AI conferences disproportionately cite research treating LLMs as synthetic social minds and multi-agent societies.
Large language models (LLMs) increasingly shape communication, learning, work, creativity, and decision-making, yet social-science research on these developments remains fragmented. We map this emerging field using a curated corpus of 198 papers reviewed in full and a field-scale corpus of 47,719 published papers from five bibliographic databases. Combining sentence embeddings, K-means clustering, within-cluster Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA), author and LLM classifications, and structural topic modeling, we identify three domains: LLM as Social Minds, examining socially interpretable model behavior; LLM Societies, examining collective dynamics among interacting model-based agents; and LLM-Human Interactions, examining how people perceive, use, and are affected by LLMs. These domains contain 13 subcategories spanning reasoning, personality and bias, behavioral games, collective intelligence, simulation, trust, work, creativity, and education. In the curated corpus, the three-domain solution is highly stable under resampling (adjusted Rand index = 0.952), and K-means assignments agree with author full-text classifications for 77.78% of papers. At field scale, 13 of 15 topics map onto the taxonomy, while K-means and structural-topic-model domains agree for 73.83% of overlapping papers. LLM-Human Interactions accounts for 78.02% of domain-mapped topic mass, but venue analysis reveals a contrasting pattern: Social Minds and LLM Societies together account for 66.37% of highly cited papers in leading conference venues, whereas LLM-Human Interactions accounts for 76.81% in the corresponding journal subset. The resulting taxonomy provides a reproducible framework for understanding how model behavior, agent interaction, and institutional context jointly shape the social consequences of LLMs.
