Human Behavior Prediction

Large language models (LLMs) have the potential to meet a key goal in economics: a quantitative model of household decision making, across a variety of settings. Yet existing evaluations cover few surveys and outcomes, and do not study how households adjust to changing economic conditions. We introduce a new evaluation, HouseholdBench, which unites 6 U.S. household surveys and 32 prediction tasks spanning numeric, categorical and probabilistic outcomes, related to consumption, income, labor, expectations, and housing. Using past behavior, demographics and macroeconomic conditions, the tasks test whether LLMs predict behavior, including how households adjust to changes in various policies. We evaluate 13 proprietary and open-weight LLMs against a no-change baseline and a gradient-boosted tree model. Most LLMs outperform the no-change baseline, including for policy response tasks -- with the best model lowering error for numeric outcomes by 12.2%. Across most tasks, gradient-boosted trees rank first; leading proprietary LLMs approach their performance, but open-weight models lag. LLMs exhibit systematic over- and underprediction across different tasks. We identify methods that enable a 4 billion parameter open-weight model to match proprietary models' performance: fine-tuning and aggregating 16 predictions per observation. Improvements generalize to policy-response tasks, which are excluded from fine-tuning. We release our datasets, code, and leaderboard on our website: https://jn-huang.github.io/householdbench

Accurate forecasting of pathological outcomes is a central problem in psychology. To do so, psychologists often collect intensive longitudinal data. However, in such studies, the desire to acquire a large number of variables for the sake of accurate prediction is often counteracted by the need to minimize participant burden. Acquiring more variables per occasion can yield better predictions, but having too many acquisitions increase the risk of non-response and attrition. Longitudinal Active Feature Acquisition (LAFA) is a principled approach to resolve this conundrum. Instead of requiring responses to every item at every acquisition occasion, LAFA produces a policy that seeks to optimally select dynamic subsets of items to be acquired at each timepoint while preserving our ability to forecast a specific outcome. However, existing LAFA methods are mostly based on Neural Networks (NN) that are difficult to interpret in practice. In this work, we introduce a tree distillation method for learning an interpretable policy from NN-based LAFA networks. We validated our method through both a simulation and an empirical EMA dataset on forecasting daily alcohol consumption. In both cases, we find that we can meaningfully reduce the number of items acquired at each occasion with minimal loss in accuracy. Networks (NN) that are difficult to interpret in practice. In this work, we introduce a tree distillation method for learning an interpretable policy from NN-based LAFA networks. We validated our method through both a simulation and an empirical EMA dataset on forecasting daily alcohol consumption. In both cases, we find that we can meaningfully reduce the number of items acquired at each occasion with minimal loss in accuracy.

We often plan ambitiously yet act habitually and wonder, in retrospect, whether we would have planned differently had we known what we would actually do. Hindsight offers a valuable perspective on past decisions, although we often wish we could have simulated hindsight at the moment of choosing. If a system could generate plausible trajectories from one's personal history, such previews might help people formulate more realistic plans and make better informed decisions. We introduce NextMe-800, an approximately 800-hour first-person dataset from one volunteer over 126 days with 1 Hz images, gaze, and audio, captioned at five hierarchical abstraction levels from atomic actions to major activities. We formulate personalized action anticipation as open-vocabulary K-step sequence prediction and construct NextAct, a 1,500-point benchmark combining NextMe-800 with the multi-person EgoLife dataset. Using an embedding-based soft edit distance as the metric, we evaluate how well different models can anticipate personal behavior across abstraction levels and prediction horizons. NextMe-800 and NextAct provide a months-long resource and evaluation framework for studying how far ahead personal behavior can be anticipated from egocentric observation.

Detecting violence after it begins is important from recognizing behavioral cues that appear immediately beforehand. This work studies short-horizon pre-incident risk recognition from multimodal video signals. We construct a binary Normal-versus-Risky setting from temporally annotated XD-Violence clips, using 443 samples with source-level separation across training, validation, and test sets. Each sample consists of a variable-length pre-incident clip, with its duration determined by the observable behavioral context preceding the incident. The inci- dent itself is excluded from all input clips. We evaluate three complementary information sources: facial-region appearance, temporally aligned audio, and body-motion features derived from tracked keypoints. Controlled ablations are performed with Swin-Tiny, ViT-Tiny, and DeiT-Tiny to measure the contribution of each modality under the same split. Results show that combining all modalities is more effective than using any other combination alone. The best configuration, Deit-Tiny with audio, facial appearance, and motion, achieves 91.21% accuracy, 88.96% balanced accuracy, 93.65% F1-score, and 96.38% ROC-AUC on the held-out test set. These results suggest that complementary appearance, acoustic, and kinematic cues provide useful evidence for recognizing elevated pre-incident risk.

Test-time scaling and post-training have improved LLM performance in coding and mathematical reasoning, but their effectiveness for individual stance prediction remains unclear. We study this question by predicting a person's stance in a new discussion from their history. We evaluate widely used test-time scaling strategies and post-training methods, such as supervised fine-tuning and reinforcement learning, and identify four failure modes across generation, selection, and learning: (1) incorrect consensus, where repeated samples agree on the wrong stance; (2) selection failure, where generation covers the observed stance but selection misses it; (3) response overfitting, where supervised fine-tuning improves imitation but harms prediction; and (4) early plateau, where reinforcement learning shows modest initial gains followed by limited further improvement. We expose these failures using STANCE-BENCH, which contains 2499 prediction tasks from 500 Hacker News users. Guided by this analysis, we explore a simple approach that combines direct scores for all candidate stances with explicit assessments of support from the individual's history. On the 781-task test set, this approach achieves 21.83 discussion-specific Macro F1 with Qwen3-8B, compared with 19.27 for direct scoring. Our results motivate evaluating candidate generation, final selection, and person-specific evidence use separately. Our data is available at https://github.com/stance-bench/Stance-Bench.

AI-moderated interviews are emerging as a scalable market-research method for generating consumer insights and building consumer "digital twins." Yet it remains unclear whether they match human-moderated interviews or improve on simpler, static data collection methods. In a pre-registered, between-subjects study (N = 317) with three industry partners, we compare AI-moderated (N = 139), human-moderated (N = 24), and static interviews (N = 154). AI moderation matches human moderation in depth, covers more themes, and, holding budget constant, recovers significantly more customer needs than human moderation or static interviews. However, participants sound more emotionally engaged when speaking to a live human. We then create digital twins using interview data and evaluate each twin against the participant's own held-out responses to six real-world marketing stimuli. We find that digital twins created from AI-moderated interviews predict consumer responses better than demographics-only personas. However, the additional richness from AI moderation does not translate into better quantitative predictions compared to static interviews. By analyzing open-ended thoughts generated from humans versus their twins, we find that prediction errors are connected both to differences in (self-reported) thinking styles between twins and humans, and to gaps between training and validation data (i.e., asking questions that are too far out of distribution).

We focus on human-robot collaborative transport, a challenging task of broad relevance spanning logistics, manufacturing, and the home, in which a user and a robot work together to relocate a large or heavy object. To act as an effective partner, the robot should reduce the user's effort by contributing to efficient relocation of the object while remaining physically responsive to them. Prior work often addresses these capabilities separately, producing robots that may move the object efficiently but resist user input, or accommodate the user but depend on continuous guidance. Our key insight is that obstacle-constrained collaborative transport requires integrating predictions of human collaborative behavior with compliant robot control. To this end, we introduce PROACT, a framework for human-robot collaborative transport that incorporates anticipation into compliant whole-body control through a learned model of human collaborative behavior. Trained on a large-scale, real-world dataset of dyadic human transport demonstrations, our transformer architecture distills collaborative behavior into predictions of future object motion. Across 108 real-world trials with a 9-DoF mobile manipulator, PROACT reduces mean interaction work by 59.2% and 20.4%, and mean completion time by 12.9% and 6.9%, relative to compliance-only and MPC baselines, respectively. Footage from our experiments can be found at https://youtu.be/qAGvQfVPjbk.

Web browsing often appears ephemeral: users visit a few websites, complete a task, and move on. However, even short fragments of browsing activity can contain rich and structured behavioral signals. In this work, we conduct a comparative empirical study of two complementary behavioral inference tasks: session-level user identification and next-domain prediction. Both tasks are derived from the same cleaned event stream and evaluated on large-scale anonymous browsing traces, with sessionization and splitting adapted to the temporal requirements of each task. For user identification, we evaluate classical and neural models operating on session-level behavioral and domain features. For next-domain prediction, we combine graph-based modeling with Large Language Models (LLMs). Experimental results show that short browsing sessions are highly identifiable, while future navigation actions are highly predictable from long-term interaction structure combined with recent behavioral context. Furthermore, LLM-derived semantic features yield only marginal gains over purely structural and sequential models, indicating that repeated interaction patterns remain the dominant predictive signal in the evaluated web-browsing setup. These findings highlight the extent to which interaction history substantially contributes to both user identifiability and navigation predictability in browsing traces.

Assistive autonomous systems must anticipate human goals before an observed behavior is complete. This article formulates anticipation as goal inference from a partially observed multimodal episode together with structured prediction of the remaining behavior, rather than exact motor forecasting. A compact Hierarchical Planning Decoder (HPD) is attached to a frozen neuro-symbolic recognition encoder and predicts, at four ontological levels, the next actions, the remaining activities and low-level intentions, and the episode high-level intention(HLI). The decoder is trained with soft neuro-symbolic regularization combining transition-coherence and hierarchical continuity losses, and is decoded with hard reachability masks that enforce ontological validity at inference. On a compositional four-level benchmark of 15,002 multimodal episodes built over NTU RGB+D 120 features, three headline properties are observed together. The advantage over the strongest sequential baseline grows with the anticipation horizon, from +1.7 points at step 1 to +7.3 points at step 3 (top-5). Under compositional generalization, where one parent association per multi-parent low level intention is held out, this advantage widens to +4.9 points at step 1. At the episode level, 96.8% of anticipated trajectories satisfy the joint logic constraints, above the 88.1% strongest-baseline value and the 73.9% ground-truth floor; soft logic terms alone account for a 59.8 to 71.1% relative reduction of HLI-reachability violations, and the hard masks then eliminate them entirely. Neural generation supplies predictive ranking, symbolic constraints supply onto logical validity, and their combination yields coherent hierarchical anticipation while exposing remaining challenges in compositional goal generalization and unordered set prediction.

Mobile sensing enables longitudinal monitoring of behavioral and physiological patterns in everyday settings. However, accurate prediction remains challenging in small-cohort health-sensing studies, where task-specific outcome supervision is limited relative to heterogeneous sensing data. Interpretability is also important, as model outputs should reflect meaningful behavioral and physiological patterns rather than predictive scores alone. We develop a Concept-Integrated Transformer (CIT) with LLM-guided concept supervision for explainable prediction from mobile sensing data. CIT uses a pretrained large language model to generate baseline-aware concept abnormality targets with confidence weights without manual concept annotation. Across two longitudinal datasets, CIT achieves the highest F1 score on AFFECT (0.756) and ties for the highest on a PHQ-9 dataset (0.765). The learned concept scores also reveal interpretable behavioral and physiological patterns; in AFFECT, sleep quantity and quality show the clearest difference between high and low negative affect groups. These findings support LLM-guided concept integration for accurate and interpretable prediction in small-cohort mobile sensing studies.

Anticipating whether a person will interact from one's own perspective is a highly intuitive task for humans, that relies on a combination of cues. We investigate how humans perform at predicting a person's intention to interact from a service robot's point of view, using pose-only or full video input, then benchmark different lightweight pose-based models and state-of-the-art vision-language models. We conducted our benchmark on the HUI360 dataset on a fixed pilot subset of 100 test tracks (25 positive, 75 negative). We found that with pose-only input, human annotators outperform lightweight trained pose models but not by large margins (+0.08 in F1-Score). But when given full egocentric video with a target bounding box, human annotators perform substantially better and largely outperform the Vision-Language Models (+0.2 in F1-Score). We also compared VLMs of different size and under different input conditions, and found that the best results do not correlate with model size. Our result confirms that predicting interactions is a challenging task for social robots and that reasoning-capable models are necessary but their actual reasoning capabilities alone do not suffice to match the social intuition of humans.

Loneliness is a critical public health issue among older adults, linked to higher risks of depression, cognitive decline, and mortality. Scalable, objective methods for its detection remain limited, particularly in natural conversational contexts. We analyzed speech and language markers of loneliness in 310 older adults using semi-structured telephone interviews to help understand how they process feeling lonely and how their language differs at different levels of feeling loneliness. Our multimodal framework combined linguistic features (psycholinguistic dictionaries, n-grams, and topic models) with acoustic features (pitch, tone, loudness) to examine associations with self-reported loneliness scores. Both predefined and data-driven methods captured patterns in verbal content and vocal delivery. Higher loneliness was associated with negations(r = 0.11), negative tone(r = 0.12), and conflict-related language. Lower loneliness was linked to social references(r = -0.18), motivational drives(r = -0.11), and emotional richness in speech(r = -0.12). We also found that the multimodal model (r = 0.298) outperforms the text-only and audio-only models. Findings suggest that loneliness manifests through both linguistic and acoustic cues, supporting the potential of speech-based analysis in psychological assessments and as an early indicator of emotional loneliness when used alongside existing assessments, rather than as standalone diagnostic tools.

Human mobility is central to urban planning, transportation, public health, and emergency response, yet fine-grained trajectory data are often proprietary, restricted, and privacy-sensitive. Large language models (LLMs) offer a potential alternative by generating plausible mobility traces and predicting individual movement, but their ability to infer aggregate neighborhood-level mobility remains unclear. We evaluate zero-shot LLMs on Census Block Group-level mobility prediction across four U.S. metropolitan areas using anonymized Cuebiq data to construct point-level, trajectory-level, and temporal mobility outcomes, paired with sociodemographic and built-environment predictors. We compare LLM predictions with supervised baselines and introduce a directional alignment analysis to test whether LLM-implied predictor effects agree with empirical OLS and Jonckheere-Terpstra trends. Supervised models achieve 0.580 average accuracy, compared with 0.435 for the best LLM, with spatial extent outcomes showing the strongest predictability but also the largest LLM-baseline gaps. Directional analysis shows that LLMs often rely on coarse, stable predictor-level priors that remain similar across outcomes and cities, including asymmetric treatment of protected-group predictors. Overall, LLMs can partially recover aggregate mobility patterns from urban context, but their predictions should not be treated as structurally grounded without auditing empirical alignment and potential bias.

We introduce a general, easy-to-implement AI-based modeling technique for analyzing human behavior. A key feature of this approach, which contrasts with existing modeling techniques, is that it combines the flexibility and interpretability of natural language with a mathematical structure that can be fitted to data and easily analyzed. We assign a large language model a vector of trait intensities-a type vector-and then ask it to choose actions across settings in which we observe human choices. For instance, the type vector (2,4) could correspond to "You are a player characterized by the following profile: Altruism: 2 out of 5, Risk Aversion: 4 out of 5," after which it is asked to make choices. We can then vary the traits (e.g., Altruism, Fairness, Trust,...) and values (e.g., 1-5) to minimize distance to human choices. We illustrate the method by applying it to model 119,147 decisions made by 78,657 subjects from more than 35 countries across 10 classic economic game roles. We find that human behavior can be closely matched using three dimensions: Risk Aversion, Strategic Sophistication, and Trust. The type vectors needed to fit individuals across games cluster into fewer than a dozen groups, with substantial variation in fit across subjects. Moreover, the individual type vectors can predict behavior in held-out games with different rules and available actions. More broadly, this new modeling method is highly generalizable and interpretable: we can input any vector of traits and use them to model behavior across any setting

Modern recommender systems treat observed actions as reliable proxies for user preferences, yet interactions often reflect exploration or comparison rather than stable preference expression. As interfaces evolve from static layouts toward generative UIs and immersive extended reality (XR), the need for deeper, modality-agnostic user understanding grows: these adaptive environments must decide not only what to present but where, when, how prominently, and most importantly why a user acts. We propose an Inverse Theory of Mind (IToM) pipeline that reasons backward from observed interactions to infer the beliefs, preferences, and decision-making traits that explain behavior. The pipeline reconstructs each user's decision context, including what was chosen and what alternatives were available, applies LLM-driven counterfactual reasoning to produce evidence-grounded natural-language belief statements, and synthesizes these beliefs through multi-hypothesis abductive inference into a structured user persona. We evaluate on the OPeRA dataset against ground-truth personality assessments, attitudinal surveys, and interview-based personas across four tasks: next action prediction, shopping attitude alignment, Big Five personality inference, and held-out category prediction. Results show that inferred personas match or exceed ground-truth personas and that multi-hypothesis reasoning is essential for accurate personality prediction. We further demonstrate cross-modal transferability with a persona-driven spatial banking application on VisionOS.

Mixed strategy equilibrium predicts i.i.d play: past actions should not help predict future decisions. Human players, however, systematically depart from this benchmark, and in O'Neill's zero sum card game, these departures can be predicted by black box sequence models such as LSTMs. This paper asks whether that predictive power can be achieved by transparent alternatives that also reveal the behavioural structure behind it. Using 84,060 decisions from 2,802 pairs, the analysis first benchmarks naive and behavioral models against interpretable machine learning and deep learning models, then evaluates the modified EWA specifications of prior work against these benchmarks and uses the LASSO diagnostics to motivate a further nested frequency tracking extension. The results show that repeat or avoid behavior, especially players' management of their own recent action histories, accounts for most of the interpretable and strategically exploitable signal, while frequency tracking adds little out of sample.

Predicting how a population will answer a new question is a long-standing goal. Statistical methods succeed at the level of the mass but falter at the level of the individual. Large language model simulators inherit this gap. They recover a population's central tendencies while flattening its heterogeneity, and they carry social biases and prompt brittleness that distort individual predictions. This paper introduces Anacreon, an audience simulation model that targets the individual level within a narrow, well-specified domain. Anacreon learns an authorship embedding that separates individuals, clusters a real qualitative corpus around seed people, and trains a dedicated adapter for each cluster, a mixture of minds, on a Gemma~4 12B base. It harvests demographics, psychological traits, and survey responses from public text, and augments each record with a chain-of-emotion. It reduces prompt brittleness by shuffling response options and reduces positive bias by balancing the training distribution. On a large, externally sourced survey, Anacreon reaches a state-of-the-art ordinal alignment of 0.775, the individual-level accuracy measure on which the field has converged, with a small residual bias. The work is a step toward drawing aggregate insight from faithfully simulated individuals.

Otter is a 15.3M-parameter human chess AI that predicts human move selection by modeling play as a time-aware, sequential process rather than treating each position in isolation. It combines two conditioning signals: (1) a move history encoder that conditions predictions on the last 20 moves, capturing opening preferences, positional drift, and intra-game behavioral tendencies; and (2) a time control module that modulates predictions based on clock pressure. Otter is trained on 6.1 billion positions from 117 million Lichess rapid games over 30 days on a single T4 GPU. Otter achieves 55.23% top-1 and 90.95% top-5 move-prediction accuracy, surpassing the prior state-of-the-art human chess model, Maia 2, with far fewer parameters and less training data. Across 11 Elo brackets (<1100 to >=2000), accuracy peaks at 57.38% in the 1900-1999 bracket. These results show that modeling chess as a time-aware, sequential activity yields more human-accurate move prediction than position-only approaches, using a smaller model. Code, trained models, and complete training logs are publicly released.

Human mobility prediction models, which forecast the next location in a user's trajectory, are increasingly deployed in urban analytics, navigation, and personalized services. Yet, little is known about their potential to memorize and expose sensitive user trajectories from training data. While memorization has been extensively studied in language models, mobility prediction poses unique challenges: training sequences encode human behavior at various spatial and temporal scales, creating privacy risks at different granularities. In this paper, we conduct the first systematic audit of memorization in mobility prediction models. While prior work has shown that privacy leaks can arise from such models, we systematically assess and quantify memorization risks at scale. We identify key challenges, including the lack of a randomness space, the multi-scale structure of trajectories, and user-specific behavioral diversity. To address these challenges, we introduce a framework to quantify mobility memorization at different levels of granularity: individual locations, anchor pairs, and subtrajectory segments. We also develop user-grounded reference sets to assess how likely a model is to prefer training data over realistic alternatives. Our evaluation across multiple models and datasets reveals pervasive memorization patterns that correlate with user regularity and increase the risk of data extraction at inference time. Our findings call for mandatory privacy auditing in mobility prediction models.

World models enable a predictive substrate for planning and action, yet existing formulations merely answer a physical question: what/where it is, and how will it evolve. Human behavior, however, is driven by hidden mental state (what a person believes, wants, intends, feels, and considers socially permissible), so a model that tracks the physical scene but not what each agent knows and believes about it predicts the wrong action for the right-looking scene. We formulate Mental World Modeling (MWM), a generic theoretical framework that makes mental variables core components of a world model rather than posthoc rationales: MWM aintains a coupled physical-mental world state, renders a target-specific partial observation, and simulates how candidate actions jointly update both components. We instantiate the framework in MENTIS, a training-free and fully inspectable baseline that decomposes the process into state parsing, target-observation generation, action decomposition, coupled physical and mental transition, and branch-level value evaluation. On a manually constructed, quality-controlled dataset of situated decision scenarios spanning text, image, and sounding-video stories, experiments with 8 modern LLM-based world models demonstrate that explicitly modeling the mental state is essential for predicting human decisions. Deeper analyses further expose the bottlenecks of current mental world modeling. We expect MWM as a next stage of world modeling, from simulating physical scenes to simulating the minds that act in them.

Large language models (LLMs) can predict interpersonal attraction from conversation transcripts, but it remains unclear what a speech predictor can add beyond transcript-only LLM prediction. Using Japanese speed-dating conversations, we combine predictions from a transcript-only LLM and a supervised speech predictor to estimate participants' reported liking of their partners. We show that speech can complement transcript-only LLM prediction, but that this complementarity is conditional rather than universal. Combining the two predictions significantly improves pairwise ranking accuracy over the transcript-only LLM alone in all evaluated conditions. By contrast, gains in per-participant Pearson $r$ vary across conversation rounds and rating directions, with none significant after correction. Retrospectively, these $r$ gains are concentrated among participants for whom the speech predictor is more accurate. Speech can therefore retain predictive value even when an LLM predicts attraction from transcripts. The relevant question is not simply whether speech helps, but where its complementarity emerges.

Anticipation of human behaviours facilitates autonomous systems in proactive planning. Human behaviour could be stochastic due to varying goals. Human goals typically guide their own movement and could therefore help to predict the human trajectory and human motion in the long-term. To infer the human movement intentions, the environmental context plays a significant role, in addition to the social cues expressed by the individual. Previous works on human goals prediction either require semantic knowledge of the scene, or only tackle interactions with objects. In this paper, we propose a novel multi-goal prediction method using the generative model to address the stochasticity of human movement. It leverages the current RGB scene and the human pose to predict diverse potential future goals of human movement based on the Conditional Variational Autoencoder (CVAE). Our results demonstrate that our approach is capable of generating multiple movement goals in the scene via samplings in latent space of the CVAE and exhibits generalization capability across scenarios in GTA-IM dataset and PROX dataset. Code is publicly available at \href{https://github.com/Q-Y-Yang/DiverseGoalsPrediction.git}{\texttt{https://github.com/Q-Y-Yang/DiverseGoalsPrediction}}.

Predicting student performance and characterizing metacognitive calibration are essential for personalization in intelligent tutoring systems. Prior research treats performance prediction, calibration error calculation, and variance decomposition as separate pipelines, preventing unified interpretation. I propose the Unified Behavioral Prediction and Calibration Analysis Pipeline (UBP-CAP), an integrated framework processing student pre-execution behavioral telemetry through three linked modules: (1) a LightGBM classifier with SHAP for binary correctness prediction, (2) formal calibration metrics (ECE, MCE, and Brier score decomposition) to evaluate metacognitive alignment, and (3) a crossed Generalized Linear Mixed-Effects Model (GLMM) for decomposing calibration deviations. I introduce the Predictive-Explanatory Divergence Index (PEDI), which quantifies structural divergence between predictive and explanatory feature profiles. Evaluated on 1,195 interaction records (27 students, 45 tasks), Logistic Regression achieves AUC-ROC = 0.903, outperforming LightGBM (0.878). Student naive ECE (0.109) significantly exceeds model ECE (0.068), confirming systematic miscalibration. The crossed GLMM yields ICCStudent = 0.123, showing calibration is situational rather than dispositional. PEDIcos = 0.081 (p = 0.327) indicates structural alignment between prediction and explanation on shared behavioral features.

Foundation models have been increasingly applied to behavioral science domains such as psychology, sociology, and economics. While these models show promise in tasks such as survey response prediction and human-subject experiment simulation, there remains no systematic understanding of how well they perform across diverse behavioral science tasks. We introduce BehaviorBench, a comprehensive benchmark that evaluates foundation models along four core capabilities: (1) behavior prediction and simulation, (2) strategic decision-making, (3) subject-trait inference, and (4) behavioral knowledge application. Crucially, BehaviorBench evaluates model outputs at both the individual and distributional levels, capturing not only per-subject accuracy but also population-level alignment, an essential requirement for behavioral validity. Our evaluation shows that BehaviorBench remains challenging for leading general-purpose LLMs and behavior foundation models that are specifically trained with behavioral data. We find that individual-level and distributional performance do not always align. General-purpose LLMs tend to underestimate the diversity of human responses, whereas behavior foundation models often lag behind at individual-level prediction. Our investigation further demonstrates how fine-tuning on diverse behavioral data can improve both individual-level prediction and distributional alignment, balancing these two objectives. Our results highlight the importance of evaluation at both individual and distributional levels, establishing BehaviorBench as a foundation for developing and assessing behaviorally aligned AI systems. Our BehaviorBench and models can be accessed via https://umich-foreseer.github.io/behaviorbench/

People make decisions differently in strategic interactions. Some update beliefs like a Bayesian; others exhibit biases like motivated reasoning. Although creators of large language models use simulated humans for safety evaluations and training, they often fail to cover this breadth of human behavior. We argue that cognitive science and economics provide a convenient tool for doing so, making use of mathematical models of human decision-making. We propose an approach that we call Equation-to-Behavior Prompting for guiding large language models to match cognitive models, and evaluate this approach on persuasion games based on legal decision-making. We find that large models can approximate equation-based specifications -- Bayesian updating, affine distortion, motivated updating, and Grether's $α$-$β$ model -- using prompting, but small models fail to do so. However, training small models with reinforcement learning to adhere to mathematical rules, Equation-to-Behavior RL, reduces belief error by 26.5% in out-of-distribution parameterizations. We show that these simulations can help create diverse training environments; training small models to consider different kinds of decision-makers improves average belief change by 2.5%--12% over Bayesian-only training, even when persuading GPT-5-mini. Our work could improve human simulations for training and evaluation in increasingly realistic settings, and could also enable novel research into more complicated mathematical models of human decision-making.

Predicting the timing of individual and collective panic emotional arousal before manifestation is essential for timely emergency intervention. Existing methods incorporate cognitive elements but none of them model emotion in the generative direction of the arousal process, leaving arousal timing undetermined. We argue that grounding prediction in appraisal emotion theory is necessary because it models this process explicitly in its natural generative direction, but three problems must be solved. (1) Appraisal theory posits that emotion arises from simultaneous evaluation across multiple threat dimensions, yet no prior work fuses these inputs into risk perception; (2) Existing models are trained in the opposite, behavior-bridged direction, recovering emotion merely as a post-hoc correlate of behavior; (3) Approaches that adopt LLMs as the primary decision-maker yet overlook the fragility and hallucination-proneness of their outputs. We introduce PanicCognitivePath (PCP) to address all three. A Psychological Safety Distance (PSD) model, grounded in psychological distance theory, maps four-domain signals (physical, social, cognitive, and informational) into a unified risk metric that gates entry to cognitive reasoning. An explicit Emotion node grounded in appraisal emotion theory is introduced into BDI, forming a novel Belief-Desire-Emotion-Intention (BDEI) pathway that couples threat appraisal directly to emotional arousal. Inverting the conventional LLM-as-decision-maker paradigm, PCP confines the LLM to parameter estimation for the Belief-to-Desire transition, restricting hallucinations to a single step and curbing their accumulation across steps. Experiments on Hurricane Sandy show PCP improves individual prediction accuracy by 10.68% over baselines, reduces peak count error to 7.07%.

Individual-level mobility prediction is central to urban simulation, transportation planning, and policy analysis. Supervised sequence models achieve strong accuracy but require task-specific training and offer limited decision-level transparency. Recent LLM-based methods improve interpretability, yet mostly rely on static prompts and single-pass inference, limiting their ability to seek additional evidence when mobility signals are weak or conflicting. We propose \method{}, a training-free LLM-driven agent framework that formulates next-location prediction as adaptive evidence-controlled decision making. \method{} resolves routine cases through a fast path based on historical regularity, while ambiguous cases trigger iterative tool use over recent trajectories, historical behavior, stay-move likelihood, and geographical evidence. Across three mobility datasets, AgentMob achieves the strongest overall performance among training-free LLM-based methods, with GPT-5.4 reaching 71.42% Acc@1 on BW, 33.14% on YJMob100K, and 33.50% on Shanghai ISP. On BW non-fast-path cases, the LLM controller improves Acc@1 from 30.65% to 48.62% over a same-tool statistical baseline, showing that its main benefit lies in resolving ambiguous predictions through adaptive evidence gathering. Our code is available at https://github.com/Unknown-zoo/AgentMob.

Many decision-support settings require systems that adapt to individual users, but evaluation data for this problem remain limited. Existing benchmarks for user understanding often rely on simulated users or model-generated behavior, even though recent work cautions that model-based simulations can diverge systematically from human behavior. We introduce \textsc{BehaviorBench}, a benchmark for evaluating personalized decision modeling from real-world behavioral traces. \textsc{BehaviorBench} reconstructs wallet-level decision histories from observed public prediction-market and on-chain records, and organizes them into two complementary task layers: \emph{Belief prediction}, which predicts a user's final revealed stance and confidence in a market, and \emph{Trade prediction}, which predicts the direction and amount of individual transactions. Across 2,000 evaluation wallets, the benchmark contains 141,445 Belief instances and 1,485,972 Trade instances, with disjoint support pools for retrieval-based evaluation. We evaluate frontier and open-weight generative models under four history interfaces: no personalization, direct recent history, generated user profiles, and retrieved support-wallet evidence. Personalization improves Belief prediction more consistently than Trade prediction, model rankings change across task layers and metrics, and different history interfaces expose different failure modes. \textsc{BehaviorBench} provides an evaluation setting for studying whether personalized methods can use real-world behavioral evidence rather than simulated users alone.

Adaptive systems often need to make task-specific decisions about people from limited evidence: a tutor may need to anticipate how a learner will approach a new problem, a game may need to adapt when a player enters a new level, and a human-AI system may need to infer whether a partner will persist with a plan or switch goals. These decisions depend on person-level tendencies that shape how people solve related tasks, but such tendencies are difficult to infer from standard behavioral evidence. One approach is to use aggregate outcome summaries, such as scores, completion rates, or productivity; these summaries are compact and available across tasks, but can collapse distinct behavioral processes into similar outcomes. Another approach is to use process-level traces, which record how behavior unfolds; however, process modeling within one task can entangle stable person-level tendencies with task-specific layout and affordances. In this work, we study early cross-task behavioral inference: whether partial source-task process traces can reveal transferable person-level structure that predicts strategy in a held-out target task. We introduce a Process-Level Latent Variable Model (PLVM), which encodes task-specific traces and fuses them into a shared person-level latent representation for cross-task prediction. In PowerWash Simulator, a naturalistic telemetry dataset of human gameplay, PLVM uses partial traces from two cleaning tasks to predict locally persistent Zone Planner behavior versus frequent Zone Hopper behavior in the held-out Fire Station level. Controlled simulations with known latent types show that cross-task fusion helps when source tasks reveal complementary dimensions of a shared latent process. These results suggest that process-level cross-task modeling can support early prediction of target-task strategy when observing sufficient target-task behavior is impractical.

Interactive assistance systems typically provide feedback after an action has been completed, supporting error recovery but not preventing the error itself. We present TRAFA, a real-time predictive feedback system for procedural tasks that intervenes before errors are committed. TRAFA operationalizes predictive feedback through a Track-Forecast-Act framework that tracks hand and object state, forecasts user motion conditioned on scene context, and triggers feedback when a predicted action is likely to violate task constraints. We instantiate this pipeline in a sequential assembly setting and evaluate it through both technical benchmarking and a controlled user study against conventional reactive feedback. Our results show that predictive feedback improves task accuracy and efficiency while maintaining a comparable number of feedback events. These findings position feedback timing as a key dimension in system design and show how real-time anticipation can be integrated into interactive systems to prevent errors before they occur.