Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Aligning Large Language Models with Human Opinions through Persona Selection and Value--Belief--Norm Reasoning

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2311.08385 v5 pith:XIWUEG4G submitted 2023-11-14 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords personaereasoningimplicitllmsmodelsopinionspersonaexplicit
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Reasoning and predicting human opinions with large language models (LLMs) is essential yet challenging. Current methods employ role-playing with personae but face two major issues: LLMs are sensitive to even a single irrelevant persona, skewing predictions by up to 30%, and LLMs fail to reason strategically over personae. We propose Chain-of-Opinion (COO), a simple four-step solution modeling which and how to reason with personae, inspired by the Value--Belief--Norm (VBN) theory. COO differentiates between explicit personae (demographics and ideology) and implicit personae (historical opinions), involves: (1) filtering irrelevant attributes from explicit personae, (2) ranking implicit personae into a preferential list for selecting top-k, (3) applying novel VBN reasoning to extract user environmental and personal value, belief, and norm variables for accurate and reliable predictions, and (4) iterating VBN reasoning with progressively larger lists of implicit personae to handle potential persona insufficiency. COO efficiently achieves new state-of-the-art opinion prediction via prompting with only 5 inference calls, improving prior techniques by up to 4%. Notably, fine-tuning LMs with COO data results in significantly better opinion-aligned models, by up to 23%.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Who Would You Vote For? Auditing Political Alignment in LLMs: An Italian Case-Study

    cs.CL 2026-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Auditing six LLMs on Italian political parties and leaders, the paper finds a consistent left-to-centrist preference, strong cross-model agreement, and large persona-driven shifts in scores.

Pith tools