Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI Safety

aiqbench analysis

This research audits how Large Language Models simulate social media users by testing their sensitivity to altered conversational contexts, including multimodal inputs like memes. The study demonstrates that these models can robustly shift simulated user stances based on context revisions, revealing both the potential and inherent risks of using AI as proxies for human opinion in social simulations.
Sources coveringarXiv, LessWrong, Quantum Frontiers, The Quantum Insider
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Revising Context, Shifting Simulated Stance: Auditing LLM-Based Stance Simulation in Online Discussions

arXiv2 min read

arXiv:2606.06443v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large language models are increasingly used to simulate social media users and infer how individuals may respond to online discussions. However, it remains unclear whether these simulations reflect precise user-specific beliefs or whether they are highly sensitive to semantically independent changes in conversational contexts. In this work, we study counterfactual context revision as a framework for auditing LLM-based stance simulation. Given an original online conversation, we first infer a target user's stance toward a specific topic. We then apply controlled revision strategies to the conversational context and simulate the user's stance again under the revised context. We compare text-only revision strategies with a multimodal one that incorporates meme-based context and evaluate two main effectiveness metrics, i.e., average directional stance shift and stance transition rate. The results reveal effective and robust stance transitions in both text-only and multimodal strategies across different polarization-preference mechanisms. Our study contributes an evaluation framework for understanding the context sensitivity of LLM-based stance simulation (https://github.com/STARResearchLab/StanceShift). More broadly, it highlights both the promise and risk of using LLMs as proxies for social media users in social simulation.

Abstract:Large language models are increasingly used to simulate social media users and infer how individuals may respond to online discussions. However, it remains unclear whether these simulations reflect precise user-specific beliefs or whether they are highly sensitive to semantically independent changes in conversational contexts. In this work, we study counterfactual context revision as a framework for auditing LLM-based stance simulation. Given an original online conversation, we first infer a target user's stance toward a specific topic. We then apply controlled revision strategies to the conversational context and simulate the user's stance again under the revised context. We compare text-only revision strategies with a multimodal one that incorporates meme-based context and evaluate two main effectiveness metrics, i.e., average directional stance shift and stance transition rate. The results reveal effective and robust stance transitions in both text-only and multimodal strategies across different polarization-preference mechanisms. Our study contributes an evaluation framework for understanding the context sensitivity of LLM-based stance simulation (this https URL). More broadly, it highlights both the promise and risk of using LLMs as proxies for social media users in social simulation.

Computation and Language (cs.CL); Multimedia (cs.MM); Social and Information Networks (cs.SI)

arXiv:2606.06443 [cs.CL]

(or arXiv:2606.06443v3 [cs.CL] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2606.06443 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite

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 · 281 words

Related coverage