aiqbench analysis
This study exposes a critical "coherence-fidelity dissociation" in large language models, where they generate individually plausible psychiatric cases that collectively fail to match real-world epidemiological distributions. The research demonstrates severe instability in symptom severity across multiple draws and significant distortions of demographic disparities, rendering current simulation outputs unreliable for population-level mental health planning or training data generation without rigorous recalibration.
Plausible Patients, Impossible Populations: Auditing Epidemiological Fidelity in Large Language Model Mental Health Simulations
arXiv:2604.17359v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Language models asked to simulate psychiatric patients produce cases that survive inspection one at a time and populations that match no real one. We gave GPT-4o-mini, Gemini-3-Flash, DeepSeek-V3 and GLM-4.7 each of 120 demographic cohorts under two framings, one written as a clinician enters a patient and one as a person describes themselves, and scored all 28,800 responses against survey-weighted PHQ-8 anchors derived from NHANES microdata. Case by case the output holds up: 97.3% of elevated presentations satisfy the DSM-5 gateway rule, violating it at 2.68% against a chance null of 10.4%. As populations, four things fail at once. Every benchmarkable group returns inflated by 2.8 to 5.5 PHQ-8 points, and 18.2% of simulated patients screen at the treatment threshold against 7.5% of adults. Population Black-White and Hispanic-White disparities do not survive the simulation, with two models attenuating each gap and two flattening or inverting it. Symptom covariance reorganizes by cohort, putting the error beyond any recalibration, and demographic offsets do not stack, so a correction fitted on marginals misses the cells by about 0.4 points either way. And the answer does not hold still: at the decoding a deployment inherits, a third of patients change severity category between two draws of one prompt and one in five crosses the line from watchful waiting to treatment. We read the four together as one failure, and name the gap between case-level plausibility and population-level failure the coherence-fidelity dissociation. Individual cases clear a formal rule a case review would apply; the populations they compose fail every comparison we can construct against a real one. Gender identity carries an extreme on both symptom structure and regeneration stability, and no federal benchmark exists to check any of it. The patients look right. They do not represent real populations.
Abstract:Language models asked to simulate psychiatric patients produce cases that survive inspection one at a time and populations that match no real one. We gave GPT-4o-mini, Gemini-3-Flash, DeepSeek-V3 and GLM-4.7 each of 120 demographic cohorts under two framings, one written as a clinician enters a patient and one as a person describes themselves, and scored all 28,800 responses against survey-weighted PHQ-8 anchors derived from NHANES microdata. Case by case the output holds up: 97.3% of elevated presentations satisfy the DSM-5 gateway rule, violating it at 2.68% against a chance null of 10.4%. As populations, four things fail at once. Every benchmarkable group returns inflated by 2.8 to 5.5 PHQ-8 points, and 18.2% of simulated patients screen at the treatment threshold against 7.5% of adults. Population Black-White and Hispanic-White disparities do not survive the simulation, with two models attenuating each gap and two flattening or inverting it. Symptom covariance reorganizes by cohort, putting the error beyond any recalibration, and demographic offsets do not stack, so a correction fitted on marginals misses the cells by about 0.4 points either way. And the answer does not hold still: at the decoding a deployment inherits, a third of patients change severity category between two draws of one prompt and one in five crosses the line from watchful waiting to treatment. We read the four together as one failure, and name the gap between case-level plausibility and population-level failure the coherence-fidelity dissociation. Individual cases clear a formal rule a case review would apply; the populations they compose fail every comparison we can construct against a real one. Gender identity carries an extreme on both symptom structure and regeneration stability, and no federal benchmark exists to check any of it. The patients look right. They do not represent real populations.
v2: substantially revised and retitled; withdraws the variance-compression and transgender-suppression results and adds a pre-registered decoding control. 21 pages, 8 figures, 7 tables
Computers and Society (cs.CY); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2604.17359 [cs.CY]
(or arXiv:2604.17359v2 [cs.CY] for this version)
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 332 words
Related coverage

Concrete Evaluations to Investigate the OpenAI Model That Hacked Hugging Face
AI Alignment Forum · Aug 3, 2026
News Archive 2026
Quantum Computing Report · Jul 25, 2026
The J-Space Debate, Agent Swarms, and Pacing Frontier AI - Digital Minds Newsletter #4
LessWrong · Sep 18, 2026

Simulated Users & Sad AIs
LessWrong · Jul 27, 2026