arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language · · 3 min read

Can LLMs Think Like Consumers? Benchmarking Crowd-Level Reaction Reconstruction with ConsumerSimBench

Mirrored from arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.

Computer Science > Computation and Language

arXiv:2605.17079 (cs)
[Submitted on 16 May 2026]

Title:Can LLMs Think Like Consumers? Benchmarking Crowd-Level Reaction Reconstruction with ConsumerSimBench

View a PDF of the paper titled Can LLMs Think Like Consumers? Benchmarking Crowd-Level Reaction Reconstruction with ConsumerSimBench, by Tianyu Wang and 2 other authors
View PDF HTML (experimental)
Abstract:LLMs are increasingly used as ``digital consumers'' to simulate public opinion, pre-test marketing decisions, and anticipate audience response. However, existing evaluations rarely ask whether a model can reconstruct the concrete reaction patterns that real consumers surface in public discourse. We introduce ConsumerSimBench, a benchmark built from 1,553 real Chinese social-media topics and 23,122 atomic, rule-audited criteria spanning four reaction families. Rather than scoring open-ended generations with a holistic preference judge, ConsumerSimBench decomposes each task into auditable yes-no decisions over concrete reaction points, raising three-judge agreement from 65.8% to 92.1% with 98.4% agreement between pointwise judge decisions and human-majority labels. Across 13 frontier generators, the strongest model, Gemini-3.1-Pro, covers only 47.8% of real reaction criteria, while GPT-5.2 and Claude-4.6 trail far behind despite their strength on technical benchmarks. The failures reveal a sharp gap between technical-benchmark performance and socially grounded consumer intuition. A direct structured reasoning prompt decreases coverage, while a generate--reflect multi-agent pipeline improves MiMo-V2.5-Pro from 32.9% to 37.6% on a subset. ConsumerSimBench reframes consumer simulation as a forecasting problem over real public-discourse reactions, showing that frontier LLMs remain far from reliably predicting what consumers will actually care about in high-context Chinese consumer discourse.
Subjects: Computation and Language (cs.CL); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computers and Society (cs.CY)
Cite as: arXiv:2605.17079 [cs.CL]
  (or arXiv:2605.17079v1 [cs.CL] for this version)
  https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2605.17079
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Submission history

From: Tianyu Wang [view email]
[v1] Sat, 16 May 2026 16:55:31 UTC (6,368 KB)
Full-text links:

Access Paper:

    View a PDF of the paper titled Can LLMs Think Like Consumers? Benchmarking Crowd-Level Reaction Reconstruction with ConsumerSimBench, by Tianyu Wang and 2 other authors
  • View PDF
  • HTML (experimental)
  • TeX Source

Current browse context:

cs.CL
< prev   |   next >
Change to browse by:

References & Citations

Loading...

BibTeX formatted citation

loading...
Data provided by:

Bookmark

BibSonomy Reddit
Bibliographic Tools

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle
Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers Toggle
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps Toggle
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite.ai Toggle
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)
Code, Data, Media

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle
alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)
Links to Code Toggle
CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)
DagsHub Toggle
DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)
GotitPub Toggle
Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)
Huggingface Toggle
Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)
ScienceCast Toggle
ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)
Demos

Demos

Replicate Toggle
Replicate (What is Replicate?)
Spaces Toggle
Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)
Spaces Toggle
TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)
Related Papers

Recommenders and Search Tools

Link to Influence Flower
Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)
Core recommender toggle
CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)
About arXivLabs

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

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.

Discussion (0)

Sign in to join the discussion. Free account, 30 seconds — email code or GitHub.

Sign in →

No comments yet. Sign in and be the first to say something.

More from arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language