Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper analyzes the risks and ethical considerations of using LLM-based agent simulations for policy decisions. It argues that simulations of human behavior, especially of marginalized populations, are not neutral and can be misused. The authors propose three preconditions鈥攁voiding neutrality assumptions, ensuring population participation, and establishing accountability鈥攖o guide the responsible development and deployment of these simulations.
LLM-powered simulations of societal behavior risk encoding and amplifying existing biases unless strict ethical preconditions are enforced.
Simulations, and more recently LLM agent simulations, have been adopted as useful tools for policymakers to explore interventions, rehearse potential scenarios, and forecast outcomes. While LLM simulations have enormous potential, two critical challenges remain understudied: the dual-use potential of accurate models of individual or population-level human behavior and the difficulty of validating simulation outputs. In light of these limitations, we must define boundaries for both simulation developers and decision-makers to ensure responsible development and ethical use. We propose and discuss three preconditions for societal-scale LLM agent simulations: 1) do not treat simulations of marginalized populations as neutral technical outputs, 2) do not simulate populations without their participation, and 3) do not simulate without accountability. We believe that these guardrails, combined with our call for simulation development and deployment reports, will help build trust among policymakers while promoting responsible development and use of societal-scale LLM agent simulations for the public benefit.
BAIR