User Behavior Simulation with Large Language Model-based Agents
Abstract
Simulating high quality user behavior data has always been a fundamental yet challenging problem in human-centered applications such as recommendation systems, social networks, among many others. The major difficulty of user behavior simulation originates from the intricate mechanism of human cognitive and decision processes. Recently, substantial evidence has suggested that by learning huge amounts of web knowledge, large language models (LLMs) can achieve human-like intelligence and generalization capabilities. Inspired by such capabilities, in this article, we take an initial step to study the potential of using LLMs for user behavior simulation in the recommendation domain. To make LLMs act like humans, we design profile, memory and action modules to equip them, building LLM-based agents to simulate real users. To enable interactions between different agents and observe their behavior patterns, we design a sandbox environment, where each agent can interact with the recommendation system, and different agents can converse with their friends via one-to-one chatting or one-to-many social broadcasting. In the experiments, we first demonstrate the believability of the agent-generated behaviors based on both subjective and objective evaluations. Then, to show the potential applications of our method, we simulate and study two social phenomena including (1) information cocoons and (2) user conformity behaviors. We find that controlling the personalization degree of recommendation algorithms and improving the heterogeneity of user social relations can be two effective strategies for alleviating the problem of information cocoon, and the conformity behaviors can be highly influenced by the amount of user social relations. To advance this direction, we have released our project at https://github.com/RUC-GSAI/YuLan-Rec .
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Efforts to scale up LLM-driven agents continue to grapple with critical limitations, including computational inefficiencies and inaccurate user behaviors.
“these efforts continue to grapple with critical limitations, including computational inefficiencies and inaccurate user behaviors.”
From AgentSociety: Large-Scale Simulation of LLM-Driven Generative Agents Advances Understanding of Human Behaviors and Society (2025) · cites this paper as [104]
Cites
Explainable Recommendation: A Survey and New Perspectives
Zhang, Y., & Chen, X. (2020) · Foundations and Trends® in Information Retrieval · doi:10.1561/1500000066 · Cited by 755 · see citing works
Self-citationConversational Recommender System
Sun, Y., & Zhang, Y. (2018) · The 41st International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research & Development in Information Retrieval · doi:10.1145/3209978.3210002 · Cited by 378 · see citing works
Self-collaboration code generation via ChatGPT
Dong, Y., Jiang, X., Jin, Z., & Li, G. (2024) · ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology · doi:10.1145/3672459 · Cited by 256 · cited 1× · see citing works
“These agents are widely applied in various scenarios and applications, such as autonomous software development [50–52], serving as tools to assist humans in accomplishing specific tasks [53–55], and acting as planners to break down complex tasks and generate executable plans [56–58].”
Wixted, J. T., & Ebbesen, E. B. (1997) · Memory & Cognition · doi:10.3758/bf03211316 · Cited by 237 · see citing works
SGLang: Efficient Execution of Structured Language Model Programs
Zheng, L., Yin, L., Xie, Z., Sun, C., Huang, J., Yu, C. H., Cao, S., Kozyrakis, C., Stoica, I., Gonzalez, J. E., et al. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2312.07104 · Cited by 145 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Ongoing research on enabling structured outputs from LLMs [86] is something we plan to incorporate in future work.”
Artifactual power curves in forgetting
Anderson, R. B., & Tweney, R. D. (1997) · Memory & Cognition · doi:10.3758/bf03211315 · Cited by 129 · see citing works
S3: Social-network Simulation System with Large Language Model-Empowered Agents
Gao, C., Lan, X., Lu, Z., Mao, J., Piao, J., Wang, H., Jin, D., & Li, Y. (2023) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4607026 · Cited by 113 · see citing works
Huang, J., Oosterhuis, H., de Rijke, M., & van Hoof, H. (2020) · Fourteenth ACM Conference on Recommender Systems · doi:10.1145/3383313.3412252 · Cited by 64 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Evaluating the Long-Term Memory of Large Language Models
Jia, Z., Liu, Q., Li, H., Chen, Y., & Liu, J. (2025) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2025 · doi:10.18653/v1/2025.findings-acl.1014 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
“In many practical applications, such as personal assistants (Lu et al., 2023), personalized recommendations (Wang et al., 2023c), and dialogue systems (Zhong et al., 2024), models need to retain and utilize past information over the long term to provide more accurate and consistent responses.”
Human-inspired Perspectives: A Survey on AI Long-term Memory
He, Z., Lin, W., Zheng, H., Zhang, F., Jones, M. W., Aitchison, L., Xu, X., Liu, M., Kristensson, P. O., & Shen, J. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2411.00489 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
“Notably, this model and its derivative theories are frequently referenced in AI memory research [61, 11, 14], bridging the fields of human and AI memory studies.”
OASIS: Open Agent Social Interaction Simulations with One Million Agents
Yang, Z., Zhang, Z., Zheng, Z., Jiang, Y., Gan, Z., Wang, Z., Ling, Z., Chen, J., Ma, M., Dong, B., et al. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2411.11581 · Cited by 3
“In this section, we describe the workflow and critical internal mechanisms of OASIS , which enable it to be easily generalized and scaled to support the simulation of millions of LLM-based agents.”
Self-citationPiao, J., Yan, Y., Zhang, J., Li, N., Yan, J., Lan, X., Lu, Z., Zheng, Z., Wang, J. Y., Zhou, D., et al. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2502.08691 · Cited by 43 · see citing works
“Besides, researchers have begun exploring methods to scale up LLM-driven agents to support larger populations [94, 100, 109].”
Self-citation
- Authors
- Wang, L., Zhang, J., Yang, H., Chen, Z.-Y., Tang, J., Zhang, Z., Chen, X., Lin, Y., Sun, H., Song, R., Zhao, X., Xu, J., Dou, Z., Wang, J., & Wen, J.-R.
- Affiliations
- Renmin University of China (CN)
- School of Information, Renmin University of China, Beijing, China
- University College London, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
- ORCID
- Venue
- ACM Transactions on Information Systems
- Published
- 2025-01-28
- Volume
- 43
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 1-37
- ISSN
- 1046-8188 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-2868
- OpenAlex
- W4405643789
- Cited by
- 59
- References
- 8
- Citations by year
- 2026: 37 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 1
- FWCI
- 22.18
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- ACM Transactions on Information Systems (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Recommender Systems and Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Keywords
- user behavior simulation, LLM agents, recommender systems, agent-based modeling, sandbox, information cocoons, social networks, personalization, agent believability
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review