aiqbench analysis
This study evaluates the capability of zero-shot Large Language Models to predict fine-grained human mobility patterns without access to proprietary trajectory data. The findings reveal that while LLMs can partially recover aggregate movement trends, they often rely on coarse, stable priors that fail to align structurally with empirical baselines and may exhibit bias against protected groups. Consequently, the research underscores the critical need for rigorous auditing before deploying LLM-generated mobility insights in high-stakes domains like urban planning and public health.
Do LLMs Know Your Neighborhood? Auditing LLM Priors for Neighborhood-Level Mobility Prediction and Structural Alignment
arXiv:2609.00345v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Human mobility is central to urban planning, transportation, public health, and emergency response, yet fine-grained trajectory data are often proprietary, restricted, and privacy-sensitive. Large language models (LLMs) offer a potential alternative by generating plausible mobility traces and predicting individual movement, but their ability to infer aggregate neighborhood-level mobility remains unclear. We evaluate zero-shot LLMs on Census Block Group-level mobility prediction across four U.S. metropolitan areas using anonymized Cuebiq data to construct point-level, trajectory-level, and temporal mobility outcomes, paired with sociodemographic and built-environment predictors. We compare LLM predictions with supervised baselines and introduce a directional alignment analysis to test whether LLM-implied predictor effects agree with empirical OLS and Jonckheere-Terpstra trends. Supervised models achieve 0.580 average accuracy, compared with 0.435 for the best LLM, with spatial extent outcomes showing the strongest predictability but also the largest LLM-baseline gaps. Directional analysis shows that LLMs often rely on coarse, stable predictor-level priors that remain similar across outcomes and cities, including asymmetric treatment of protected-group predictors. Overall, LLMs can partially recover aggregate mobility patterns from urban context, but their predictions should not be treated as structurally grounded without auditing empirical alignment and potential bias.
Title:Do LLMs Know Your Neighborhood? Auditing LLM Priors for Neighborhood-Level Mobility Prediction and Structural Alignment
Abstract:Human mobility is central to urban planning, transportation, public health, and emergency response, yet fine-grained trajectory data are often proprietary, restricted, and privacy-sensitive. Large language models (LLMs) offer a potential alternative by generating plausible mobility traces and predicting individual movement, but their ability to infer aggregate neighborhood-level mobility remains unclear. We evaluate zero-shot LLMs on Census Block Group-level mobility prediction across four U.S. metropolitan areas using anonymized Cuebiq data to construct point-level, trajectory-level, and temporal mobility outcomes, paired with sociodemographic and built-environment predictors. We compare LLM predictions with supervised baselines and introduce a directional alignment analysis to test whether LLM-implied predictor effects agree with empirical OLS and Jonckheere-Terpstra trends. Supervised models achieve 0.580 average accuracy, compared with 0.435 for the best LLM, with spatial extent outcomes showing the strongest predictability but also the largest LLM-baseline gaps. Directional analysis shows that LLMs often rely on coarse, stable predictor-level priors that remain similar across outcomes and cities, including asymmetric treatment of protected-group predictors. Overall, LLMs can partially recover aggregate mobility patterns from urban context, but their predictions should not be treated as structurally grounded without auditing empirical alignment and potential bias.
Machine Learning (cs.LG); Computers and Society (cs.CY)
arXiv:2609.00345 [cs.LG]
(or arXiv:2609.00345v1 [cs.LG] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.00345 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 302 words
Related coverage

Presentation: From Models to Agents: Building Context-Aware Consumer AI at Scale at DoorDash
InfoQ · Aug 15, 2026

Presentation: From Retrieval to Reasoning: Building Production-Ready Agentic AI Systems with Knowledge Graphs
InfoQ · Sep 12, 2026
[AINews] High Taste Testers Ep. 1
Latent Space · Oct 17, 2026

Simulated Users & Sad AIs
LessWrong · Jul 27, 2026