Exploring Causal Mechanisms with Generative Agent-Based Models

Large language models (LLMs) can generate high-level diverse phenomena without explicitly programmed rules. This capability has led to their adoption within different agent-based models (ABMs) and social simulations. Recent studies investigate their ability to generate different phenomena of interest, for example, human behavior on social media platforms or alien behavior in game-theoretic scenarios. However, capability, prediction, and explanation are different--drawing from the philosophy of science and mechanisms literature, explanation requires showing, to some degree, how a phenomenon is produced by related organized entities and activities. For modelers, describing the characteristics of an experiment or whether a simulation provides progress in capability (or explanation), can be difficult without being grounded in potentially distant research areas. We integrate recent work on LLM-ABMs with contemporary philosophy of science literature and use it to operationalize a definition of 'plausibility' in a four-level scale. Our scale separates the evaluation of a model's generative sufficiency (ability to reproduce a phenomenon) from its mechanistic plausibility (how the phenomenon could be produced), and clarifies the distinct roles of different models, such as predictive and explanatory ones. We introduce this as the Mechanism Plausibility Scale.

Computational social science has developed descriptive, interpretative, and predictive modeling, but comprehensive modeling combining in-world human intervention with outcome forecasting remains underexplored. Generative agent-based platforms scale populations or reproduce complex scenarios, but researchers typically act through setup, external controls, or post-hoc analysis rather than in-world roles. We introduce Computational Multi-Agent Society Experiments (CMASE), a generative agent-based framework for in-world researcher participation and traceable interventions at runtime. Treating simulation as a simulated ethnographic field, CMASE supports (1) real-time human-computer interaction to study intervention processes; (2) controlled experiments with ethnography-inspired observation, interviewing, and interpretation; and (3) forward exploration of intervention trajectories and downstream responses. CMASE combines LLM-driven perception, memory, and emotion; a composable environment built from texture and area maps; and researcher roles spanning observation, interviewing, participation, and intervention, so that interventions enter as social events rather than exogenous parameters. We replicate two published field studies from different disciplines: urban greenery and social fragmentation, and cooperation in a public goods game, using two substantially different language models. CMASE reproduces reported statistical patterns and provides process-level records for mechanism-oriented interpretation. A controlled comparison shows that embedded social interventions leave observable, auditable processes that parametric manipulation does not. These findings highlight CMASE's methodological value for studying interventions in small- and medium-scale social settings and its interdisciplinary potential. The official code is available at: https://github.com/armihia/CMASE.

LLM-empowered agent simulations are increasingly used to study social emergence, yet the micro-to-macro causal mechanisms behind macro outcomes often remain unclear. This is challenging because emergence arises from intertwined agent interactions and meso-level feedback and nonlinearity, making generative mechanisms hard to disentangle. To this end, we introduce CAMO, an automated Causal discovery framework from Micro behaviors to Macro Emergence in LLM agent simulations. CAMO converts mechanistic hypotheses into computable factors grounded in simulation records and learns a compact causal representation centered on an emergent target $Y$. CAMO outputs a computable Markov boundary and a minimal upstream explanatory subgraph, yielding interpretable causal chains and actionable intervention levers. It also uses simulator-internal counterfactual probing to orient ambiguous edges and revise hypotheses when evidence contradicts the current view. Experiments across four emergent settings demonstrate the promise of CAMO.