Michael Bernstein

Also published as: Michael S. Bernstein


2025

pdf bib
Finetuning LLMs for Human Behavior Prediction in Social Science Experiments
Akaash Kolluri | Shengguang Wu | Joon Sung Park | Michael S. Bernstein
Proceedings of the 2025 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing

Large language models (LLMs) offer a powerful opportunity to simulate the results of social science experiments. In this work, we demonstrate that finetuning LLMs directly on individual-level responses from past experiments meaningfully improves the accuracy of such simulations. We construct SocSci210 via an automatic pipeline, a dataset comprising 2.9 million responses from 400,491 participants in 210 open-source social science experiments. Through finetuning, we achieve multiple levels of generalization. In completely unseen studies, our strongest model, Socrates-Qwen-14B, produces predictions that are 36% more aligned with distributions of human responses to diverse outcome questions under varying conditions relative to its base model (Qwen2.5-14B), outperforming GPT-4o by 15%. By finetuning on a subset of conditions in a study, generalization to new unseen conditions is particularly robust, improving by 71%. Since SocSci210 contains rich demographic information, we reduce demographic parity difference, a measure of bias, by 10.6% through finetuning. Because social sciences routinely generate rich, topic-specific datasets, our findings indicate that finetuning on such data could enable more accurate simulations for experimental hypothesis screening. We release our data, models and finetuning code.

2023

pdf bib
On Second Thought, Let’s Not Think Step by Step! Bias and Toxicity in Zero-Shot Reasoning
Omar Shaikh | Hongxin Zhang | William Held | Michael Bernstein | Diyi Yang
Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers)

Generating a Chain of Thought (CoT) has been shown to consistently improve large language model (LLM) performance on a wide range of NLP tasks. However, prior work has mainly focused on logical reasoning tasks (e.g. arithmetic, commonsense QA); it remains unclear whether improvements hold for more diverse types of reasoning, especially in socially situated contexts. Concretely, we perform a controlled evaluation of zero-shot CoT across two socially sensitive domains: harmful questions and stereotype benchmarks. We find that zero-shot CoT reasoning in sensitive domains significantly increases a model’s likelihood to produce harmful or undesirable output, with trends holding across different prompt formats and model variants. Furthermore, we show that harmful CoTs increase with model size, but decrease with improved instruction following. Our work suggests that zero-shot CoT should be used with caution on socially important tasks, especially when marginalized groups or sensitive topics are involved.