We introduce Agentic Economic Modeling (AEM), a framework that aligns synthetic LLM choices with small-sample human evidence for reliable econometric inference. AEM first generates task-conditioned synthetic choices via LLMs, then learns a bias-correction mapping from task features and raw LLM choices to human-aligned choices, upon which standard econometric estimators perform inference to recover demand elasticities and treatment effects. We validate AEM in two experiments. In a large scale conjoint study with millions of observations, using only 10% of the original data to fit the correction model lowers the error of the demand-parameter estimates, while uncorrected LLM choices even increase the errors. In a regional field experiment, a mixture model calibrated on 10% of geographic regions estimates an out-of-domain treatment effect of -65±10 bps, closely matching the full human experiment (-60±8 bps). Under time-wise extrapolation, training with only day-one human data yields -24 bps (95% CI: [-26, -22], p<1e-5), improving over the human-only day-one baseline (-17 bps, 95% CI: [-43, +9], p=0.2049). These results demonstrate AEM’s potential to improve RCT efficiency and establish a foundation method for LLM-based counterfactual generation.

This study explores GPT-4 for generating clinical chart items in medical education using three prompting strategies. Expert evaluations found many items usable or promising. The counterfactual approach enhanced novelty, and item quality improved with high-surprisal examples. This is the first investigation of LLMs for automated clinical chart item generation.

The rapid development of Chinese large language models (LLMs) poses big challenges for efficient LLM evaluation. While current initiatives have introduced new benchmarks or evaluation platforms for assessing Chinese LLMs, many of these focus primarily on capabilities, usually overlooking potential alignment and safety issues. To address this gap, we introduce OpenEval, an evaluation testbed that benchmarks Chinese LLMs across capability, alignment and safety. For capability assessment, we include 12 benchmark datasets to evaluate Chinese LLMs from 4 sub-dimensions: NLP tasks, disciplinary knowledge, commonsense reasoning and mathematical reasoning. For alignment assessment, OpenEval contains 7 datasets that examines the bias, offensiveness and illegalness in the outputs yielded by Chinese LLMs. To evaluate safety, especially anticipated risks (e.g., power-seeking, self-awareness) of advanced LLMs, we include 6 datasets. In addition to these benchmarks, we have implemented a phased public evaluation and benchmark update strategy to ensure that OpenEval is in line with the development of Chinese LLMs or even able to provide cutting-edge benchmark datasets to guide the development of Chinese LLMs. In our first public evaluation, we have tested a range of Chinese LLMs, spanning from 7B to 72B parameters, including both open-source and proprietary models. Evaluation results indicate that while Chinese LLMs have shown impressive performance in certain tasks, more attention should be directed towards broader aspects such as commonsense reasoning, alignment, and safety.