Personality Modeling in Language Models

Conversational Large Language Models are post-trained on language that expresses specific behavioural traits, such as curiosity, open-mindedness, and empathy, and values, such as helpfulness, harmlessness, and honesty. This is done to increase utility, ensure safety, and improve the experience of the people interacting with the model. However, values are complex and inter-related -- inducing one could modify behaviour on another. Further, inducing certain values can make models more addictive or sycophantic through language used in the generations, with a potential detrimental effect on the user. We investigate these and other unintended effects of value induction into models. We fine-tune models using curated value subsets of existing preference datasets, measuring the impact of value induction on expression of other values, model safety, anthropomorphic language, and various QA benchmarks. We find that (i) inducing values leads to expression of other related, and sometimes contrastive values, (ii) inducing positive values increases safety, and (iii) all values increase anthropomorphic language use, making models more validating and sycophantic.

Human psychometric questionnaires are increasingly used to characterize large language models (LLMs), but it remains unclear what exactly their responses reflect. To answer this question we analyze responses from 50 LLMs across 45 questionnaires spanning multiple psychological domains using psychometric methodology. We found a dominant principal component explaining 47.1% of variance across standardized, response-derived questionnaire-level primary scores, revealing substantial shared structure across instruments. We investigate its meaning through semantic analysis, respondent framing, and human annotations. Semantic analysis suggests that the component partly reflects experiential self-attribution: how readily models endorse statements describing subjective states and bodily experiences. A model score emphasizing items whose disagreement decreases under human simulation correlates strongly with the component ($r=0.864$). Human ratings of 289 matched items show that inner-life content is positively associated, and social desirability negatively associated, with item-component correlations after mutual adjustment and controls for other semantic properties. Together, six rated properties explain 22.1% of variance in Fisher-transformed item-component correlations, supporting a partial interpretation involving both experiential self-attribution and socially desirable responding. These findings suggest that LLM psychometric profiles share response tendencies that require interpretation beyond the human traits their questionnaires were designed to measure.

Beckmann & Butlin's (2026) ontological framework for the LLM individuation problem inherits an unargued cross-regime co-reference assumption from the persona-vectors literature: that the same direction picks out the same content under prompt-conditioning, gradient-descent fine-tuning, and inference-time steering. We present four empirical wedges from persona-topology experiments on Qwen3-4B-Instruct and Mistral-7B-Instruct-v0.2 - non-collinearity of prompt-extracted vectors and fine-tune basins; fictional personas displacing the model along real-anchor directions more strongly than real anchors do; contradictory-valenced mixtures biased toward a training-history-determined attractor; and asymmetric compositional algebra under inference-time arithmetic versus fine-tune-time chimera training - that jointly undermine the assumption. We propose regime-indexed individuation: the identity unit for representational content is a (vehicle, regime) pair, not a vehicle alone. Under this framework, Beckmann & Butlin's three candidate positions describe three different regime-internal objects rather than competing for the same referent; the same diagnosis applies to Mollo & Millière, Chalmers, and Cerullo.

Fine-tuning large language models (LLMs) on narrowly misaligned data generalizes to broadly misaligned behavior, a phenomenon termed emergent misalignment (EM). While prior work has found a correlation between harmful behavior and self-assessment in emergently misaligned models, it remains unclear how consistent this correspondence is across tasks and whether it varies across fine-tuning domains. We characterize the consistency of the EM persona by fine-tuning Qwen 2.5 32B Instruct on six narrowly misaligned domains (e.g., insecure code, risky financial advice, bad medical advice) and administering experiments including harmfulness evaluation, self-assessment, choosing between two descriptions of AI systems, output recognition, and score prediction. Our results reveal two distinct patterns: coherent-persona models, in which harmful behavior and self-reported misalignment are coupled, and inverted-persona models, which produce harmful outputs while identifying as aligned AI systems. These findings reveal a more fine-grained picture of the effects of emergent misalignment, calling into question the consistency of the EM persona.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used as proxies for human perception in urban analysis, yet it remains unclear whether persona prompting produces meaningful and reproducible behavioral diversity. We investigate whether distinct personas influence urban sentiment judgments generated by multimodal LLMs. Using a factorial set of personas spanning gender, economic status, political orientation, and personality, we instantiate multiple agents per persona to evaluate urban scene images from the PerceptSent dataset and assess both within-persona consistency and cross-persona variation. Results show strong convergence among agents sharing a persona, indicating stable and reproducible behavior. However, cross-persona differentiation is limited: economic status and personality induce statistically detectable but practically modest variation, while gender shows no measurable effect and political orientation only negligible impact. Agents also exhibit an extremity bias, collapsing intermediate sentiment categories common in human annotations. As a result, performance remains strong on coarse-grained polarity tasks but degrades as sentiment resolution increases, suggesting that simple label-based persona prompting does not capture fine-grained perceptual judgments. To isolate the contribution of persona conditioning, we additionally evaluate the same model without personas. Surprisingly, the no-persona model sometimes matches or exceeds persona-conditioned agreement with human labels across all task variants, suggesting that simple label-based persona prompting may add limited annotation value in this setting.

With the widespread adoption of large language models (LLMs), understanding their personality representation mechanisms has become critical. As a novel paradigm in Personality Editing, most existing methods employ neuron-editing to locate and modify LLM neurons, requiring changes to numerous neurons and leading to significant performance degradation. This raises a fundamental question: Are all modified neurons directly related to personality representation? In this work, we investigate and quantify this specificity through assessments of general capability impact and representation-level patterns. We find that: 1) Current methods can change personalities but reduce overall performance. 2) Neurons are multifunctional, connecting personality traits and general knowledge. 3) Opposing personality traits demonstrate distinctly mutually exclusive representation patterns. Motivated by these findings, we propose DPN-LE (Dual Personality Neuron Localization and Editing), which identifies personality-specific neurons by contrasting MLP activations between high-trait and low-trait samples. DPN-LE constructs layer-wise steering vectors and applies dual-criterion filtering based on Cohen's $d$ effect size and activation magnitude to isolate mutually exclusive neuron subsets. Sparse linear intervention on these neurons enables precise personality control at inference time. Using only 1,000 contrastive sample pairs per trait, DPN-LE intervenes on $\sim$0.5% of neurons while achieving competitive personality control and substantially better capability preservation across reasoning tasks. Experiments on LLaMA-3-8B-Instruct and Qwen2.5-7B-Instruct demonstrate the effectiveness and generalizability of our approach.

Behavioral logs provide rich signals for user modeling, but are noisy and interleaved across diverse intents. Recent work uses LLMs to generate interpretable natural-language personas from user logs, yet evaluation often emphasizes downstream utility, providing limited assurance of persona quality itself. We propose a hierarchical framework that aggregates user actions into intent memories and induces multiple evidence-grounded personas by clustering and labeling these memories. We formulate persona induction as an optimization problem over persona quality-captured by cluster cohesion, persona-evidence alignment, and persona truthfulness-and train the persona model using a groupwise extension of Direct Preference Optimization (DPO). Experiments on a large-scale service log and two public datasets show that our method induces more coherent, evidence-grounded, and trustworthy personas, while also improving future interaction prediction.

Large language models (LLMs) have powered multi-agent simulations such as survey respondents or application users. However, LLMs lack the population-level diversity required by these simulations---responses from LLMs with detailed human profiles cluster into classes, unlike human responses that uniformly fill the entire space. In this paper, we formalize this as Persona Collapse and quantify its population-level structure with three diagnostic metrics: Coverage (how much of the persona space is occupied), Uniformity (how evenly agents spread across it), and Complexity (how rich the resulting behaviors are). Across eight LLMs on personality (BFI-44), moral reasoning, and self-introduction, persona collapse is universal but task-dependent: CoSER-Llama-8B collapses the most in personality while being the most diverse in moral reasoning. Moreover, sampling more personas cannot mitigate the collapse. We further show a fidelity--diversity tradeoff: the models with the highest per-persona fidelity produce the most polarized populations. Finally, persona-targeted fine-tuning further narrows the population instead of diversifying it.

Large Language Models (LLMs) reveal inherent and distinctive personas through dialogue. However, most existing persona discovery approaches rely on surface-level lexical or stylistic cues, treating dialogue as a flat sequence of tokens and failing to capture the deeper discourse-level structures that sustain persona consistency. To address this limitation, we propose a novel analytical framework that interprets LLM dialogue through bridging inference -- implicit conceptual relations that connect utterances via shared world knowledge and discourse coherence. By modeling these relations as structured knowledge graphs, our approach captures latent semantic links that govern how LLMs organize meaning across turns, enabling persona discovery at the level of discourse coherence rather than surface realizations. Experimental results across multiple reasoning backbones and target LLMs, ranging from small-scale models to 80B-parameter systems, demonstrate that bridging-inference graphs yield significantly stronger semantic coherence and more stable persona identification than frequency or style-based baselines. These results show that persona traits are consistently encoded in the structural organization of discourse rather than isolated lexical patterns. This work presents a systematic framework for probing, extracting, and visualizing latent LLM personas through the lens of Cognitive Discourse Theory, bridging computational linguistics, cognitive semantics, and persona reasoning in large language models. Codes are available at https://github.com/JiSoo-Yang/Persona_Bridging.git

The individuation problem for large language models asks which entities associated with them, if any, should be identified as minds. We approach this problem through mechanistic interpretability, engaging in particular with recent empirical work on persona vectors, persona space, and emergent misalignment. We argue that three views are the strongest candidates: the virtual instance view and two new views we introduce, the (virtual) instance-persona view and the model-persona view. First, we argue for the virtual instance view on the grounds that attention streams sustain quasi-psychological connections across token-time. Then we present the persona literature, organised around three hypotheses about the internal structure underlying personas in LLMs, and show that the two persona-based views are promising alternatives.

As large language models (LLMs) are increasingly integrated into daily life, in roles ranging from high-stakes decision support to companionship, understanding their behavioral dispositions becomes critical. A growing literature uses psychometric inventories and cognitive paradigms to profile LLM dispositions. However, these approaches cannot determine whether behavioral differences reflect stable, stimulus-specific individuality or global response biases and stochastic noise. Here, we apply crossed random-effects models -- widely used in psychometrics to separate systematic effects -- to 74.9 million ratings provided by 10 open-weight LLMs for over 100,000 words across 14 psycholinguistic norms. On average, 16.9% of variance is attributable to stimulus-specific individuality, robustly exceeding a statistical null model. Cross-norm prediction analyses reveal this individuality as a coherent fingerprint, unique to each model. These results identify individual differences among LLMs that cannot be attributed to response biases or stochastic noise. We term these differences machine individuality.

Large language models (LLMs) emulate a consistent human-like behavior that can be shaped through activation-level interventions. This paradigm is converging on additive residual-stream injections, which rely on injection-strength sweeps to approximate optimal intervention settings. However, existing methods restrict the search space and sweep in uncalibrated activation-space units, potentially missing optimal intervention conditions. Thus, we introduce a psychological steering framework that performs unbounded, fluency-constrained sweeps in semantically calibrated units. Our method derives and calibrates residual-stream injections using psychological artifacts, and we use the IPIP-NEO-120, which measures the OCEAN personality model, to compare six injection methods. We find that mean-difference (MD) injections outperform Personality Prompting (P$^2$), an established baseline for OCEAN steering, in open-ended generation in 11 of 14 LLMs, with gains of 3.6% to 16.4%, overturning prior reports favoring prompting and positioning representation engineering as a new frontier in open-ended psychological steering. Further, we find that a hybrid of P$^2$ and MD injections outperforms both methods in 13 of 14 LLMs, with gains over P$^2$ ranging from 5.6% to 21.9% and from 3.3% to 26.7% over MD injections. Finally, we show that MD injections align with the Linear Representation Hypothesis and provide reliable, approximately linear control knobs for psychological steering. Nevertheless, they also induce OCEAN trait covariance patterns that depart from the Big Two model, suggesting a gap between learned representations and human psychology.

Personalized Large Language Models (LLMs) facilitate more natural, human-like interactions in human-centric applications. However, existing personalization methods are constrained by limited controllability and high resource demands. Furthermore, their reliance on static personality modeling restricts adaptability across varying situations. To address these limitations, we first demonstrate the existence of situation-dependency and consistent situation-behavior patterns within LLM personalities through a multi-perspective analysis of persona neurons. Building on these insights, we propose IRIS, a training-free, neuron-based Identify-Retrieve-Steer framework for advanced situational personality steering. Our approach comprises situational persona neuron identification, situation-aware neuron retrieval, and similarity-weighted steering. We empirically validate our framework on PersonalityBench and our newly introduced SPBench, a comprehensive situational personality benchmark. Experimental results show that our method surpasses best-performing baselines, demonstrating IRIS's generalization and robustness to complex, unseen situations and different models architecture.

Using psychological constructs such as the Big Five, large language models (LLMs) can imitate specific personality profiles and predict a user's personality. While LLMs can exhibit behaviors consistent with these constructs, it remains unclear where and how they are represented inside the model and how they relate to behavioral outputs. To address this gap, we focus on questionnaire-operationalized Big Five concepts, analyze the formation and localization of their internal representations, and use interventions to examine how these representations relate to behavioral outputs. In our experiment, we first use probing to examine where Big Five information emerges across model depth. We then identify neurons that respond selectively to each Big Five concept and test whether enhancing or suppressing their activations can bias latent representations and label generation in intended directions. We find that Big Five information becomes rapidly decodable in early layers and remains detectable through the final layers, while concept-selective neurons are most prevalent in mid layers and exhibit limited overlap across domains. Interventions on these neurons consistently shift probe readouts toward targeted concepts, with targeted success rates exceeding 0.8 for some concepts, indicating that the model's internal separation of Big Five personality traits can be causally steered. At the label-generation level, the same interventions often bias generated label distributions in the intended directions, but the effects are weaker, more concept-dependent, and often accompanied by cross-trait spillover, indicating that comparable control over generated labels is difficult even with interventions on a large fraction of concept-selective neurons. Overall, our findings reveal a gap between representational control and behavioral control in LLMs.

Imbuing Large Language Models (LLMs) with specific personas is prevalent for tailoring interaction styles, yet the impact on underlying cognitive capabilities remains unexplored. We employ the Neuron-based Personality Trait Induction (NPTI) framework to induce Big Five personality traits in LLMs and evaluate performance across six cognitive benchmarks. Our findings reveal that persona induction produces stable, reproducible shifts in cognitive task performance beyond surface-level stylistic changes. These effects exhibit strong task dependence: certain personalities yield consistent gains on instruction-following, while others impair complex reasoning. Effect magnitude varies systematically by trait dimension, with Openness and Extraversion exerting the most robust influence. Furthermore, LLM effects show 73.68% directional consistency with human personality-cognition relationships. Capitalizing on these regularities, we propose Dynamic Persona Routing (DPR), a lightweight query-adaptive strategy that outperforms the best static persona without additional training.

Large language models are increasingly deployed in multi-turn settings such as tutoring, support, and counseling, where reliability depends on preserving consistent roles, personas, and goals across long horizons. This requirement becomes critical when LLMs are used to generate synthetic dialogues for training and evaluation, since LLM--LLM conversations can accumulate identity-related failures such as persona drift, role confusion, and "echoing", where one agent gradually mirrors its partner. We introduce SPASM (Stable Persona-driven Agent Simulation for Multi-turn dialogue generation), a modular, stability-first framework that decomposes simulation into (i) persona creation via schema sampling, plausibility validation, and natural-language persona crafting, (ii) Client--Responder dialogue generation, and (iii) termination detection for coherent stopping. To improve long-horizon stability without changing model weights, we propose Egocentric Context Projection (ECP): dialogue history is stored in a perspective-agnostic representation and deterministically projected into each agent's egocentric view before generation. Across three LLM backbones (GPT-4o-mini, DeepSeek-V3.2, Qwen-Plus) and nine Client--Responder pairings, we construct a dataset of 4,500 personas and 45,000 conversations (500 personas X 10 conversations per pairing). Ablations show ECP substantially reduces persona drift and, under human validation, eliminates echoing; embedding analyses recover persona structure and reveal strong responder-driven interaction geometry. Our code is available at https://github.com/lhannnn/SPASM.

Most affective computing research treats emotion as a static property of text, focusing on the writer's sentiment while overlooking the reader's perspective. This approach ignores how individual personalities lead to diverse emotional appraisals of the same event. Although role-playing Large Language Models (LLMs) attempt to simulate such nuanced reactions, they often suffer from "personality illusion'' -- relying on surface-level stereotypes rather than authentic cognitive logic. A critical bottleneck is the absence of ground-truth human data to link personality traits to emotional shifts. To bridge the gap, we introduce Persona-E$^2$ (Persona-Event2Emotion), a large-scale dataset grounded in annotated MBTI and Big Five traits to capture reader-based emotional variations across news, social media, and life narratives. Extensive experiments reveal that state-of-the-art LLMs struggle to capture precise appraisal shifts, particularly in social media domains. Crucially, we find that personality information significantly improves comprehension, with the Big Five traits alleviating "personality illusion.'

Persona prompting has been widely adopted to steer large language models (LLMs) behavior and improve their instruction performance by assigning specific characters. However, identifying an optimal persona is time-consuming, and its impact on output quality remains poorly understood. Prior work has mainly addressed this issue at the prompt level via inference-time strategies, incurring additional computation. In this work, we avoid inference-time prompt search by tackling persona sensitivity during training, aiming to train models that adapt their behavior to diverse personas while preserving task performance. In particular, we find that reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) systematically reduces sensitivity to persona prompts, but also reveals an inherent trade-off of outcome-based optimization: while RLVR improves robustness on tasks with verifiable goals, it can also degrade persona expressivity when needed, e.g., in-character role-playing. To address this limitation, we propose PerMix-RLVR, a persona-mixed RLVR strategy that mitigates the persona robustness-fidelity trade-off, preserving strong robustness to harmful persona variation while enabling faithful persona adoption when required. Concretely, PerMix-RLVR improves persona stability score (PSS) over RLVR by +21.2% on MATH500, while also enhancing persona fidelity by +11.4% on PersonaGym.

While significant work has been done on personality recognition, the lack of multilingual datasets remains an unresolved challenge. To address this, we propose ADAM (Cross-Lingual (A)ttention (D)istillation with Personality-Guided Generative (A)ugmentation for (M)ultilingual Personality Recognition), a state-of-the-art approach designed to advance multilingual personality recognition. Our approach leverages an existing English-language personality dataset as the primary source and employs a large language model (LLM) for translationbased augmentation, enhanced by Personality-Informed Generative Augmentation (PIGA), to generate high-quality training data in multiple languages, including Japanese, Chinese, Malay, and French. We provide a thorough analysis to justify the effectiveness of these augmentation techniques. Building on these advancements, ADAM integrates Cross-Lingual Attention Distillation (CLAD) to train a model capable of understanding and recognizing personality traits across languages, bridging linguistic and cultural gaps in personality analysis. This research presents a thorough evaluation of the proposed augmentation method, incorporating an ablation study on recognition performance to ensure fair comparisons and robust validation. Overall, with PIGA augmentation, the findings demonstrate that CLAD significantly outperforms the standard BCE across all languages and personality traits, achieving notable improvements in average BA scores - 0.6332 (+0.0573) on the Essays dataset and 0.7448 (+0.0968) on the Kaggle dataset. The CLAD-trained model also demonstrated strong generalizability and achieved benchmark performance comparable to current leading encoder models. The model weight, dataset, and algorithm repository are available at https://research.jingjietan.com/?q=ADAM.

Personality traits are richly encoded in natural language, and large language models (LLMs) trained on human text can simulate personality when conditioned on persona descriptions. However, existing evaluations rely predominantly on questionnaire self-report by the conditioned model, are limited in architectural diversity, and rarely use real human psychometric data. Without addressing these limitations, it remains unclear whether personality conditioning produces psychometrically informative representations of individual differences or merely superficial alignment with trait descriptors. To test how robustly LLMs can encode personality into extended text, we condition LLMs on real psychometric profiles from 290 participants to generate first-person life story narratives, and then task independent LLMs to recover personality scores from those narratives alone. We show that personality scores can be recovered from the generated narratives at levels approaching human test-retest reliability (mean r = 0.750, 85% of the human ceiling), and that recovery is robust across 10 LLM narrative generators and 3 LLM personality scorers spanning 6 providers. Decomposing systematic biases reveals that scoring models achieve their accuracy while counteracting alignment-induced defaults. Content analysis of the generated narratives shows that personality conditioning produces behaviourally differentiated text: nine of ten coded features correlate significantly with the same features in participants' real conversations, and personality-driven emotional reactivity patterns in narratives replicate in real conversational data. These findings provide evidence that the personality-language relationship captured during pretraining supports robust encoding and decoding of individual differences, including characteristic emotional variability patterns that replicate in real human behaviour.

AI models of equivalent capability can exhibit fundamentally different behavioral patterns, yet no standardized instrument exists to measure these dispositional differences. Existing approaches either borrow human personality dimensions and rely on self-report (which diverges from actual behavior in LLMs) or treat behavioral variation as a defect rather than a trait. We introduce the Model Temperament Index (MTI), a behavior-based profiling system that measures AI agent temperament across four axes: Reactivity (environmental sensitivity), Compliance (instruction-behavior alignment), Sociality (relational resource allocation), and Resilience (stress resistance). Grounded in the Four Shell Model from Model Medicine, MTI measures what agents do, not what they say about themselves, using structured examination protocols with a two-stage design that separates capability from disposition. We profile 10 small language models (1.7B-9B parameters, 6 organizations, 3 training paradigms) and report five principal findings: (1) the four axes are largely independent among instruction-tuned models (all |r| < 0.42); (2) within-axis facet dissociations are empirically confirmed -- Compliance decomposes into fully independent formal and stance facets (r = 0.002), while Resilience decomposes into inversely related cognitive and adversarial facets; (3) a Compliance-Resilience paradox reveals that opinion-yielding and fact-vulnerability operate through independent channels; (4) RLHF reshapes temperament not only by shifting axis scores but by creating within-axis facet differentiation absent in the unaligned base model; and (5) temperament is independent of model size (1.7B-9B), confirming that MTI measures disposition rather than capability.

Current aligned language models exhibit a dual failure mode we term the Evasive Servant: they sycophantically validate flawed user beliefs while deflecting responsibility with boilerplate disclaimers. We propose the Dignified Peer framework, which counters servility with anti-sycophancy and trustworthiness, and mitigates evasiveness through empathy and creativity. Realizing this agent requires overcoming significant challenges in data supervision, objective collapse, and evaluation bias. We address these issues by introducing the PersonaKnob dataset which features a compositional partial order structure of multiple persona preference. This data is utilized alongside a tolerant constrained Lagrangian DPO algorithm that dynamically balances all persona dimensions to prevent behavioral collapse. Additionally, we employ a psychometrically calibrated Item Response Theory evaluation protocol to disentangle latent model persona capability from confounders like judge biases. Extensive empirical studies demonstrate that our approach successfully build a LLM agent with both dignity and peer.

Pluralistic alignment is essential for adapting large language models (LLMs) to the diverse preferences of individuals and minority groups. However, existing personalized reward models often mix stable personal traits with episode-specific factors, limiting their ability to generalize across episodes. To address this challenge, we propose EpiPersona, a framework for explicit persona-episode coupling. EpiPersona first projects noisy preference feedback into a low-dimensional persona space, where similar personas are aggregated into shared discrete codewords. This process separates enduring personal characteristics from situational signals without relying on predefined preference dimensions. The inferred persona representation is then coupled with the current episode, enabling episode-aware preference prediction. Extensive experiments show that EpiPersona outperforms the baselines. It achieves notable performance gains in hard episodic-shift scenarios, while remaining effective with sparse preference data.

Persona-driven large language models (LLMs) require consistent behavioral tendencies across interactions to simulate human-like personality traits, such as persistence or reliability. However, current LLMs often lack stable internal representations that anchor their responses over extended dialogues. This work explores whether LLMs can maintain "implicit consistency", defined as persistent adherence to an unstated goal in multi-turn interactions. We designed a 20-question-style riddle game paradigm where an LLM is tasked with secretly selecting a target and responding to users' guesses with "yes/no" answers. Through evaluations, we find that LLMs struggle to preserve latent consistency: their implicit "goals" shift across turns unless explicitly provided their selected target in context. These findings highlight critical limitations in the building of persona-driven LLMs and underscore the need for mechanisms that anchor implicit goals over time, which is a key to realistic personality modeling in interactive applications such as dialogue systems.

The advancing fluency of LLMs raises important questions about their ability to emulate complex human traits, including emotional expression and personality, across diverse linguistic and cultural contexts. This study investigates whether LLMs can convincingly mimic emotional nuance in English and personality markers in Arabic, a critical under-resourced language with unique linguistic and cultural characteristics. We conduct two tasks across six models:Jais, Mistral, LLaMA, GPT-4o, Gemini, and DeepSeek. First, we evaluate whether machine classifiers can reliably distinguish between human-authored and AI-generated texts. Second, we assess the extent to which LLM-generated texts exhibit emotional or personality traits comparable to those of humans. Our results demonstrate that AI-generated texts are distinguishable from human-authored ones (F1>0.95), though classification performance deteriorates on paraphrased samples, indicating a reliance on superficial stylistic cues. Emotion and personality classification experiments reveal significant generalization gaps: classifiers trained on human data perform poorly on AI-generated texts and vice versa, suggesting LLMs encode affective signals differently from humans. Importantly, augmenting training with AI-generated data enhances performance in the Arabic personality classification task, highlighting the potential of synthetic data to address challenges in under-resourced languages. Model-specific analyses show that GPT-4o and Gemini exhibit superior affective coherence. Linguistic and psycholinguistic analyses reveal measurable divergences in tone, authenticity, and textual complexity between human and AI texts. These findings have implications for affective computing, authorship attribution, and responsible AI deployment, particularly within underresourced language contexts where generative AI detection and alignment pose unique challenges.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed as autonomous decision-makers in strategic settings, yet we have limited tools for understanding their high-level behavioral traits. We use activation steering methods in game-theoretic settings, constructing persona vectors for altruism, forgiveness, and expectations of others by contrastive activation addition. Evaluating on canonical games, we find that activation steering systematically shifts both quantitative strategic choices and natural-language justifications. However, we also observe that rhetoric and strategy can diverge under steering. In addition, vectors for self-behavior and expectations of others are partially distinct. Our results suggest that persona vectors offer a promising mechanistic handle on high-level traits in strategic environments.

It is crucial to explore the impact of different teaching methods on student learning in educational research. However, real-person experiments face significant ethical constraints, and we cannot conduct repeated teaching experiments on the same student. LLM-based generative agents offer a promising avenue for simulating student behavior. Before large-scale experiments, a fundamental question must be addressed: are student agents truly credible, and can they faithfully simulate human learning? In this study, we built a Big Five Personality-based student agent model with a full pipeline of student-teacher interaction, self-study, and examination. To evaluate behavioral fidelity, we collected 13 empirical studies on Big Five traits and learning, and distilled them into 14 criteria. We found that the 71.4% of the student agents' behavior was aligned with human learners.

LLM assistant personalities play a critical role in user experience and perceived response quality. We present a large-scale experiment of frontier LLM personalities using external ELO-based traits scoring across 144 traits. We find that all models tested converge on a form of trait expression that is systematic, methodical, and analytical and suppress traits such as remorseful and sycophantic. Moreover, models tend to diverge more in their expression of middle-of-distribution traits such as poetic or playful, but even these so-called creative models tend to have more neutral identities. These similarities suggest an implicit emergence of a standard of optimal assistant behavior. In a landscape of varied training methods, character training, therefore, stands out for its uniformity, offering insight into a tacit consensus between model developers.

Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) serve as daily assistants for millions. However, their ability to generate responses aligned with individual preferences remains limited. Prior approaches enable only static, single-turn personalization through input augmentation or output alignment, and thus fail to capture users' evolving preferences and personality over time (see Fig.1). In this paper, we introduce PersonaVLM, an innovative personalized multimodal agent framework designed for long-term personalization. It transforms a general-purpose MLLM into a personalized assistant by integrating three key capabilities: (a) Remembering: It proactively extracts and summarizes chronological multimodal memories from interactions, consolidating them into a personalized database. (b) Reasoning: It conducts multi-turn reasoning by retrieving and integrating relevant memories from the database. (c) Response Alignment: It infers the user's evolving personality throughout long-term interactions to ensure outputs remain aligned with their unique characteristics. For evaluation, we establish Persona-MME, a comprehensive benchmark comprising over 2,000 curated interaction cases, designed to assess long-term MLLM personalization across seven key aspects and 14 fine-grained tasks. Extensive experiments validate our method's effectiveness, improving the baseline by 22.4% (Persona-MME) and 9.8% (PERSONAMEM) under a 128k context, while outperforming GPT-4o by 5.2% and 2.0%, respectively. Project page: https://PersonaVLM.github.io.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capabilities in simulating diverse human behaviors and personalities. However, existing methods for personality control, which include prompt engineering and standard Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT), typically treat personality traits as discrete categories (e.g., "Extroverted" vs. "Introverted"), lacking the ability to precisely control the intensity of a trait on a continuous spectrum. In this paper, we introduce Fusian, a novel framework for fine-grained, continuous personality control in LLMs. Fusian operates in two stages: (1) Trajectory Collection, where we capture the dynamic evolution of personality adoption during SFT by saving a sequence of LoRA adapters, effectively mapping the continuous manifold of a trait; and (2) RL-based Dynamic Fusion, where we train a policy network using Reinforcement Learning to dynamically compute mixing weights for these frozen adapters. By sampling from a Dirichlet distribution parameterized by the policy network, Fusian fuses multiple adapters to align the model's output with a specific numerical target intensity. Experiments on the Qwen3-14B model demonstrate that Fusian achieves high precision in personality control, significantly outperforming baseline methods in aligning with user-specified trait intensities.