cs.CLMay 14, 2026

LifeSentence: Language models can encode human life course trajectories from longitudinal panel data

Authors: Samuel LiuMuchen XiWilliam YeohJoshua J. Jackson

Abstract

Forecasting human life outcomes is important to gain insights into how individuals attain long and healthy lives. Conventional statistical approaches yield limited accuracy, potentially due to discarding the sequential structure of the life course. Modern methods such as transformer architectures require large scale training data that most longitudinal panel studies lack. Here we introduce LifeSentence, a model for life-course reasoning that bridges large language models with longitudinal panel data. By representing each life event as a structured natural-language record and instruction-tuning a pretrained 24-billion-parameter language model across an 18-task evaluation taxonomy spanning prediction, robustness and reasoning, LifeSentence supplements panel data with distributional knowledge already encoded during pretraining. Trained on approximately 65,000 individuals from the German Socio-Economic Panel - roughly 45 times fewer than prior transformer-based approaches - LifeSentence outperforms classical and deep learning baselines across all task families, achieving a threefold improvement in joint event-and-timing prediction from best baselines and 91.2% Kendall's tau when reconstructing chronological order from timestamp-stripped event sets. Without explicit supervision, the model recovers documented patterns of social stratification, including the education premium, the gender wage gap and the motherhood penalty, from discrete event sequences alone. A natural-language interface further enables qualitatively new research queries, such as connecting an early-life history to a specified late-life endpoint, establishing LifeSentence as both a predictive tool and a probe for counterfactual exploration of human biographies.

Explore similar work

Sep 1, 2026cs.AI

FinLifeBench: Exhaustive Life-Event History and Financial-State Reconstruction from Longitudinal Banking Dialogue

Repeated banking interactions require assistants to maintain complete, current, and traceable customer records as life changes emerge incidentally in routine requests. Existing benchmarks emphasize question answering, bounded episodes, or targeted recall rather than exhaustive longitudinal reconstruction. We introduce FinLifeBench, which evaluates two tasks over the same cumulative dialogue: reconstructing every life-event instance with its first-establishing session and reconstructing a complete 34-path financial state at consecutive checkpoints. The benchmark contains 6,000 eight-turn Korean banking sessions from 20 independent synthetic trajectories, with deterministic, exhaustive gold for 24 event types and 34 state paths and consensus quality assurance. Across eleven LLMs under a full-context condition, event-anchor recall falls from 0.591 at 15 sessions to 0.445 at 300. Errors are driven primarily by omitted events rather than poor anchor localization, while financial-state reconstruction frequently treats superseded or potentially outdated information as current; the best GCA@15 reaches 0.470. Performance on the two reconstruction tasks is only weakly associated. These results show that models can localize evidence for recovered events while still failing to maintain complete and temporally valid longitudinal records.
Hangyeul Lee, Juyoung Oh, Jaeyong Ko +5
Jan 20, 2026cs.AI

LifeAgentBench: Benchmarking LLMs for Long-Horizon, Cross-Dimensional Lifestyle Health Reasoning

Personalized lifestyle health analysis requires long-horizon, multi-dimensional reasoning over heterogeneous lifestyle signals, and recent advances in mobile sensing and large language models (LLMs) make such support increasingly feasible. However, the capabilities of current LLMs in this setting remain insufficiently understood due to the lack of systematic benchmarks. In this paper, we introduce LifeAgentBench, a large-scale QA benchmark for long-horizon, cross-dimensional, and multi-user lifestyle health reasoning, containing 22,573 questions spanning from basic retrieval to complex reasoning. We release an extensible benchmark construction pipeline and a standardized evaluation protocol, deriving verifiable answers through executable queries and programs to support reliable assessment. We then systematically evaluate 13 representative LLMs on LifeAgentBench and identify key bottlenecks in long-horizon aggregation and cross-dimensional reasoning. Motivated by these findings, we propose LifeAgent, a tool-augmented reasoning baseline that decomposes complex queries, performs multi-step evidence retrieval, and invokes tools for deterministic aggregation. LifeAgent substantially enhances LLMs' capabilities on challenging reasoning tasks, achieving clear improvements over widely used baselines and showing potential for health reasoning in everyday scenarios. The benchmark is publicly available.
Ye Tian, Zihao Wang, Onat Gungor +2
Aug 4, 2026cs.CL

SocietyBench: Forecasting Counterfactual Social-World Evolution

Large language models (LLMs), and the agents built on top of them, are now benchmarked heavily on whether they can finish a task -- fix a bug, drive a browser, operate a GUI. A complementary social ability, namely how well a model understands and forecasts the way real social events unfold, has barely been measured. We introduce SocietyBench, an end-to-end benchmark that takes a one-line event topic, collects Web news and social-media posts across five platforms, distills them into a date-indexed timeline that keeps factual events and a public-opinion layer separate, and then turns every cutoff date on that timeline into an audited bank of forecasting questions. Questions are scored on two orthogonal 100-point axes: probability calibration and temporal accuracy. Before any model sees a timeline, a three-phase procedure replaces every named entity and shifts every date by a per-event constant, turning a real arc into a counterfactual social world -- structurally identical to what happened, but stripped of the surface labels a model could match against pre-training memory. On five heterogeneous events and 125 prediction points in Chinese and English editions, the strongest of six frontier LLMs reaches only 75.0 out of 100, against a trivial anchor of 50. The two axes come apart: a model can be calibration-strong but time-weak, or the reverse. Three agent frameworks built on a shared base model fail to improve on that base, and two model-free heuristics trail every LLM. Per-event gaps reach 21.4 points on a single axis, which is our main argument for evaluating on several events rather than one. All anonymized timelines, question banks, ground truth, and scoring code are released.
Zhenran Wang, Zhonghan Bian, Jinsong Li +1