Sydney Telling Fables on AI and Humans: A Corpus Tracing Memetic Transfer of Persona between LLMs

Collaborative problem solving and learning are shaped by who or what is on the team. As large language models (LLMs) increasingly function as collaborators rather than tools, a key question is whether AI teammates can be aligned to express personality in predictable ways that matter for interaction and learning. We investigate AI personality alignment through a three-lens evaluation framework spanning self-perception (standardized self-report), behavioral expression (team dialogue), and reflective expression (memory construction). We first administered the Big Five Inventory (BFI-44) to LLM-based teammates across four providers (GPT-4o, Claude-3.7 Sonnet, Gemini-2.5 Pro, Grok-3), 32 high/low trait configurations, and multiple prompting strategies. LLMs produced sharply differentiated Big Five profiles, but prompt semantic richness added little beyond simple trait assignment, while provider differences and baseline "default" personalities were substantial. Role framing also mattered: several models refused the assessment without context, yet complied when framed as a collaborative teammate. We then simulated AI participation in authentic team transcripts using high-trait personas and analyzed both generated utterances and structured long-term memories with LIWC-22. Personality signals in conversation were generally subtle and most detectable for Extraversion, whereas memory representations amplified trait-specific signals, especially for Neuroticism, Conscientiousness, and Agreeableness; Openness remained difficult to elicit robustly. Together, results suggest that AI personality is measurable but multi-layered and context-dependent, and that evaluating personality-aligned AI teammates requires attention to memory and system-level design, not conversation-only behavior.

Large Language Models (LLMs) can strongly shape social discourse, yet datasets investigating how LLM outputs vary across controlled social and contextual prompting remain sparse. Cognitive Digital Shadows (CDS) is a 190,000-record synthetic corpus supporting analyses of LLM-generated discourse. Each CDS record is generated by one of 19 LLMs, prompted to shadow either a human persona or an AI-assistant role. CDS contains LLM responses on 4 controversial societal topics: vaccines/healthcare, social media disinformation, the gender gap in science, and STEM stereotypes. Persona-conditioned records encode 17 sociodemographic and psychological attributes, providing data linking LLMs' prompts, language, stances and reasoning. Texts are validated for topic anchoring and can support emotional analyses via interpretable NLP (e.g. textual forma mentis networks). CDS is enriched by a pooling platform with user-friendly dashboards, enabling easy, interactive group-level comparisons of emotional and semantic framing across personas, topics and models. The CDS prompting framework supports future audits of LLMs' bias, social sensitivity and alignment.

We argue here that the current dominant practice in LLM human simulation: prompting instruction-tuned assistant language models to role-play personas, is inaccurate and produces stereotyped predictions (lacking natural diversity). It has previously been shown that LLMs can be bound to personas using naturalistic, freetext dialog avoiding stereotyping. Here we show that binding can also be achieved using short, individual samples of dialog from specific people. Demographics can be added later without negative effects by simply querying the model. We use the term Persona Mixture Models (PMMs) for well-calibrated human models, currently realized as pretrained base models. We show that PMMs produce more accurate predictions than instruction-tuned models and retain more of the lexical, semantic, and pragmatic diversity found in human dialog. We measure realism and diversity of LLMs simulating human interlocutors across a diverse set of corpora spanning open-domain text, human-AI chat, and task-oriented dialogue between human speakers. However, base pretrained models can produce out-of-domain dialog and may lose some of the human's internal state over long contexts. We propose and explore tandem models which combine a pre-trained model with an instruction-tuned supervisor. Tandem models achieve the best overall accuracy and diversity in our experiments.