How Far Are LLMs from Believable AI? A Benchmark for Evaluating the Believability of Human Behavior Simulation

Fuente: arXiv
Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Hauptverfasser: Xiao, Yang, Cheng, Yi, Fu, Jinlan, Wang, Jiashuo, Li, Wenjie, Liu, Pengfei
Format: Preprint
Veröffentlicht: 2023
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
_version_ 1866913391543582720
author Xiao, Yang
Cheng, Yi
Fu, Jinlan
Wang, Jiashuo
Li, Wenjie
Liu, Pengfei
author_facet Xiao, Yang
Cheng, Yi
Fu, Jinlan
Wang, Jiashuo
Li, Wenjie
Liu, Pengfei
contents In recent years, AI has demonstrated remarkable capabilities in simulating human behaviors, particularly those implemented with large language models (LLMs). However, due to the lack of systematic evaluation of LLMs' simulated behaviors, the believability of LLMs among humans remains ambiguous, i.e., it is unclear which behaviors of LLMs are convincingly human-like and which need further improvements. In this work, we design SimulateBench to evaluate the believability of LLMs when simulating human behaviors. In specific, we evaluate the believability of LLMs based on two critical dimensions: 1) consistency: the extent to which LLMs can behave consistently with the given information of a human to simulate; and 2) robustness: the ability of LLMs' simulated behaviors to remain robust when faced with perturbations. SimulateBench includes 65 character profiles and a total of 8,400 questions to examine LLMs' simulated behaviors. Based on SimulateBench, we evaluate the performances of 10 widely used LLMs when simulating characters. The experimental results reveal that current LLMs struggle to align their behaviors with assigned characters and are vulnerable to perturbations in certain factors.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2312_17115
institution arXiv
publishDate 2023
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle How Far Are LLMs from Believable AI? A Benchmark for Evaluating the Believability of Human Behavior Simulation
Xiao, Yang
Cheng, Yi
Fu, Jinlan
Wang, Jiashuo
Li, Wenjie
Liu, Pengfei
Computation and Language
Computers and Society
In recent years, AI has demonstrated remarkable capabilities in simulating human behaviors, particularly those implemented with large language models (LLMs). However, due to the lack of systematic evaluation of LLMs' simulated behaviors, the believability of LLMs among humans remains ambiguous, i.e., it is unclear which behaviors of LLMs are convincingly human-like and which need further improvements. In this work, we design SimulateBench to evaluate the believability of LLMs when simulating human behaviors. In specific, we evaluate the believability of LLMs based on two critical dimensions: 1) consistency: the extent to which LLMs can behave consistently with the given information of a human to simulate; and 2) robustness: the ability of LLMs' simulated behaviors to remain robust when faced with perturbations. SimulateBench includes 65 character profiles and a total of 8,400 questions to examine LLMs' simulated behaviors. Based on SimulateBench, we evaluate the performances of 10 widely used LLMs when simulating characters. The experimental results reveal that current LLMs struggle to align their behaviors with assigned characters and are vulnerable to perturbations in certain factors.
title How Far Are LLMs from Believable AI? A Benchmark for Evaluating the Believability of Human Behavior Simulation
topic Computation and Language
Computers and Society
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2312.17115