cs.LGMar 30, 2026

From Astronomy to Astrology: Testing the Illusion of Zodiac-Based Personality Prediction with Machine Learning

Authors: Abhinna Sundar Samantaray, Finnja Annika Fluhrer, Dhruv Saini, Omkar Charaple, Anish Kumar Singh, Dhruv Vansraj Rathore

Organizations: Astronomisches Rechen-Institut der Universität Heidelberg, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany · Fakultüt für Physik und Astronomie der Universität Heidelberg, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany · SBI Capital Markets Limited, Tower-I, World Trade Center, Nauroji Nagar, New Delhi, 110029, India · Institute of Computational Chemistry and Catalysis, University of Girona, Girona, Catalunya, 17004 Spain · 

Abstract

Astrology has long been used to interpret human personality, estimate compatibility, and guide social decision-making. Zodiac-based systems in particular remain culturally influential across much of the world, including in South Asian societies where astrological reasoning can shape marriage matching, naming conventions, ritual timing, and broader life planning. Despite this persistence, astrology has never established either a physically plausible mechanism or a statistically reliable predictive foundation. In this work, we examine zodiac-based personality prediction using a controlled machine-learning framework. We construct a synthetic dataset in which individuals are assigned zodiac signs and personality labels drawn from a shared pool of 100 broadly human traits. Each sign is associated with a subset of 10 common descriptors, intentionally overlapping with those assigned to other signs, thereby reproducing the ambiguity characteristic of practical astrological systems. We then train Logistic Regression, Random Forest, and neural-network classifiers to infer personality labels from zodiac-based features and nuisance covariates. Across all experiments, predictive performance remains at or near random expectation, while shuffled-label controls yield comparable accuracies. We argue that the apparent success of astrology arises not from measurable predictive structure, but from trait universality, category overlap, cognitive biases such as the Barnum effect and confirmation bias, and the interpretive flexibility of astrologers and pundits. We conclude that zodiac-based systems do not provide reliable information for predicting human behavior and instead function as culturally durable narrative frameworks. This paper is intended as a humorous academic exercise.

Figures & tables

Explore similar work

Jul 9, 2026

Large-Language-Models-as-a-Judge in Theory-Agnostic Adaptive Metric-Alignment for Prototypical Networks in Personality Recognition

Personality recognition has traditionally been constrained by theory-dependent formulations, where models are trained to fit predefined psychological taxonomies rather than uncovering shared underlying behavioral structure. This limits generalization, as personality itself is better understood as theory-invariant, while existing annotations reflect only partial and sometimes inconsistent views of the same latent traits. In this work, we introduce JAM ((J)udge for (A)daptive (M)etric-Alignment), a theory-agnostic framework that shifts learning from adapting to predefined personality theories toward discovering unified latent pseudo-facets that capture shared psychological structure. Rather than constraining the model to any personality taxonomy during training or inference, the framework learns generalizable psychological representations and can infer an individual's latent psychological profile directly from the textual samples, without requiring theory-specific labels. JAM achieves this through an Attention-Pooled Graph Prototypical Network that learns structured representations via clustering in embedding space, together with a Cross-Theory Harmonization (CTH) approach that integrates (i) Human-Guided Linkage and (ii) Machine-Induced Consensus to unify heterogeneous datasets without relying on predefined labels. To further improve robustness and data quality, we incorporate an LLM-as-a-Judge mechanism operating in two configurations, (i) LLM-before-the-loop and (ii) LLM-in-the-loop which identifies ambiguous samples to guide adaptive metric learning. Experiments show that JAM improves cross-framework generalization and performance, establishing a strong step toward theory-agnostic personality inference and supporting low-resource personality theories. The related code repository, model weights, and artifacts are available at https://research.jingjietan.com/JAM
Dec 9, 2025

Ask, Answer, and Detect: Role-Playing LLMs for Personality Detection with Question-Conditioned Mixture-of-Experts

Understanding human personality is important for personalized recommendation and mental health assessment. Existing personality detection methods typically encode social media posts into user representations and predict personality labels. Despite advances in large language models (LLMs), these methods face limited supervision from scarce labels and an unclear mapping between user language and psychological constructs. We propose ROME, a framework that incorporates psychological knowledge into personality detection. Inspired by standardized self-assessment tests, ROME uses LLM role-playing to simulate users' responses to validated psychometric questionnaires. These question-level answers provide interpretable, questionnaire-grounded evidence and intermediate supervision. A question-conditioned Mixture-of-Experts module jointly routes post and question representations to predict questionnaire answers under explicit supervision. The predicted answers are aggregated into an interpretable answer vector and fused with user representations for final personality prediction in a multi-task learning framework. Experiments on two real-world datasets show that ROME outperforms state-of-the-art baselines, with relative improvements of 13.60% on Kaggle and 19.72% on Pandora. Code is available at https://github.com/JasmineLyf/ROME.
May 12, 2026

How Well Do Large Language Models Capture Human Personality?

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to simulate human populations via persona prompting, often under the assumptions that richer persona descriptions improve behavioral fidelity, similarly sized attribute combinations are equally simulatable, and persona definitions generalize across tasks. In this work, we formalize these assumptions and systematically evaluate them across multiple architectures, scales, and simulation settings. We identify a fundamental limitation we term persona manifold collapse, where increasingly expressive persona specifications lead to systematic contraction of representational and behavioral diversity. Across models, increasing persona complexity consistently reduces inter-persona separation in latent space and weakens behavioral differentiation in downstream simulation tasks. These effects persist across multiple analyses as richer personas fail to preserve human subgroup disagreement, performance varies across attribute combinations of similar size, and adding descriptive detail often degrades rather than improves simulation fidelity. Surprisingly, simple Age-Gender personas consistently outperform richly specified Ideal Customer Profiles (ICPs) across industries, achieving substantially higher downstream prediction accuracy. We find that collapse is not uniform across attributes. Certain combinations remain behaviorally stable and preserve stronger alignment with human responses, forming localized regions we term alignment bridges. Together, our results provide empirical and conceptual foundations for understanding the limits of persona-conditioned simulation, highlighting the need for representation-aware persona construction rather than increasing persona expressivity alone.