LLM applications deployed at scale face a fundamental challenge: privacy constraints prevent direct inspection of user interactions, making it difficult to obtain any representative evaluation dataset or to track the ongoing evolution of production traffic. We present ProxyDrift, a framework that (i) identifies and measures drift between production traffic and offline evaluation sets, and (ii) constructs and refreshes those evaluation sets accordingly; all without access to raw user data. Our approach operates entirely on non-PII proxy representations: structured, multi-dimensional descriptors derived from LLM-based classification of user interactions. We introduce (1) a chance-calibrated, redundancy-aware (RA) alignment score that aggregates per-dimension drift measurements via mutual information; (2) a conditional sampler that generates synthetic proxies respecting inter-dimensional dependencies; (3) a roundtrip consistency analysis that exposes generator/classifier disagreements and guides proxy taxonomy refinement; and (4) a feedback-linkage analysis that ties per-dimension and per-value proxy distributions to user satisfaction, surfacing actionable failure and success modes. Serving hundreds of millions of users, ProxyDrift enables continuous drift monitoring and targeted synthetic data generation without exposing sensitive user data. Experiments confirm strong roundtrip consistency, discriminator-level indistinguishability of synthetic queries from human queries, and tight end-to-end alignment (RA~0.9) with production.
LLM-based simulators offer a promising path for generating complex synthetic data where traditional differentially private (DP) methods struggle with high-dimensional user profiles. But can LLMs faithfully reproduce statistical distributions from DP-protected inputs? We evaluate this using PersonaLedger, an agentic financial simulator, seeded with DP synthetic personas derived from real user statistics. We find that PersonaLedger achieves promising fraud detection utility (AUC 0.70 at epsilon=1) but exhibits significant distribution drift due to systematic LLM biases--learned priors overriding input statistics for temporal and demographic features. These failure modes must be addressed before LLM-based methods can handle the richer user representations where they might otherwise excel.
Large language models (LLMs) show potential as simulators of human behavior, offering a scalable way to study responses to interventions. However, because LLMs are trained largely on observational data, interventions in experiments with LLM-simulated synthetic users can induce unintended shifts in latent user attributes, causing user drift where the implicit simulated population differs across treatment conditions, potentially distorting effect estimates. We formalize the confounding or selection bias that can arise due to user drift and show how intervention-dependent shifts can inflate or attenuate observed differences in user responses under intervention. To diagnose confounding, we propose using negative control outcomes--attributes that should remain invariant under intervention--to identify distribution shifts across intervention conditions, providing evidence of user drift. To mitigate drift, we study adjusting the persona specification by eliciting additional confounders, finding that targeted, setting-relevant confounders can substantially reduce bias across survey-style and multi-turn agent evaluations.
Privacy and data sharing are often in tension. Many organizations use synthetic data to reduce privacy risk and still share useful data. For tabular data, auditing privacy remains hard. In many cases, even humans cannot easily tell if a table is real or synthetic. In this paper, we propose a method based on LLM discrimination. We ask an LLM to classify each table sample as REAL or SYNTHETIC. We test two settings: C1 with table only, and C2 with table plus distributional metadata. We use LLaMA as an open model and Gemini as a reference model. In our experiments, we run three synthesis models, CTGAN, TVAE, and Gaussian Copula, on two public datasets, UCI Adult and ACS Census. We collect 451 valid trials. Our results show clear differences between models. On Adult, LLaMA reaches DRS=0% in reported cells, while Gemini reaches DRS=100% for CTGAN and TVAE. On Census, LLaMA predicts SYNTHETIC for most samples, while Gemini stays high in C1 but drops for CTGAN and TVAE in C2. We also compare with a classifier two-sample test (C2ST) and record linkage as distributional baselines, and with a human pilot of 2 annotators and 240 trials. Our results show that LLM discrimination is a practical privacy audit signal when model choice, per provider reporting, and data encoding are handled with care. For reproducibility, code and experiment scripts are available at https://github.com/SlokomManel/LLM-as-a-Discriminator.