Skip to content
← Back to explorer

Towards Real-world Human Behavior Simulation: Benchmarking Large Language Models on Long-horizon, Cross-scenario, Heterogeneous Behavior Traces

Jiawei Chen, Ruoxi Xu, Boxi Cao, Ruotong Pan, Yunfei Zhang, Yifei Hu, Yong Du, Tingting Gao, Yaojie Lu, Yingfei Sun, Xianpei Han, Le Sun, Xiangyu Wu, Hongyu Lin · Apr 9, 2026 · Citations: 0

Data freshness

Extraction: Fresh

Check recency before relying on this page for active eval decisions. Use stale pages as context and verify against current hub results.

Metadata refreshed

Apr 9, 2026, 3:26 PM

Fresh

Extraction refreshed

Apr 10, 2026, 4:42 AM

Fresh

Extraction source

Persisted extraction

Confidence 0.40

Abstract

The emergence of Large Language Models (LLMs) has illuminated the potential for a general-purpose user simulator. However, existing benchmarks remain constrained to isolated scenarios, narrow action spaces, or synthetic data, failing to capture the holistic nature of authentic human behavior. To bridge this gap, we introduce OmniBehavior, the first user simulation benchmark constructed entirely from real-world data, integrating long-horizon, cross-scenario, and heterogeneous behavioral patterns into a unified framework. Based on this benchmark, we first provide empirical evidence that previous datasets with isolated scenarios suffer from tunnel vision, whereas real-world decision-making relies on long-term, cross-scenario causal chains. Extensive evaluations of state-of-the-art LLMs reveal that current models struggle to accurately simulate these complex behaviors, with performance plateauing even as context windows expand. Crucially, a systematic comparison between simulated and authentic behaviors uncovers a fundamental structural bias: LLMs tend to converge toward a positive average person, exhibiting hyper-activity, persona homogenization, and a Utopian bias. This results in the loss of individual differences and long-tail behaviors, highlighting critical directions for future high-fidelity simulation research.

Low-signal caution for protocol decisions

Use this page for context, then validate protocol choices against stronger HFEPX references before implementation decisions.

  • Extraction confidence is 0.40 (below strong-reference threshold).
  • No benchmark/dataset or metric anchors were extracted.

HFEPX Relevance Assessment

This paper is adjacent to HFEPX scope and is best used for background context, not as a primary protocol reference.

Best use

Background context only

Use if you need

A secondary eval reference to pair with stronger protocol papers.

Main weakness

Extraction confidence is 0.40 (below strong-reference threshold).

Trust level

Low

Eval-Fit Score

12/100 • Low

Treat as adjacent context, not a core eval-method reference.

Human Feedback Signal

Not explicit in abstract metadata

Evaluation Signal

Detected

HFEPX Fit

Adjacent candidate

Extraction confidence: Low

Field Provenance & Confidence

Each key protocol field shows extraction state, confidence band, and data source so you can decide whether to trust it directly or validate from full text.

Human Feedback Types

missing

None explicit

Confidence: Low Source: Persisted extraction missing

No explicit feedback protocol extracted.

Evidence snippet: The emergence of Large Language Models (LLMs) has illuminated the potential for a general-purpose user simulator.

Evaluation Modes

partial

Simulation Env

Confidence: Low Source: Persisted extraction evidenced

Includes extracted eval setup.

Evidence snippet: The emergence of Large Language Models (LLMs) has illuminated the potential for a general-purpose user simulator.

Quality Controls

missing

Not reported

Confidence: Low Source: Persisted extraction missing

No explicit QC controls found.

Evidence snippet: The emergence of Large Language Models (LLMs) has illuminated the potential for a general-purpose user simulator.

Benchmarks / Datasets

missing

Not extracted

Confidence: Low Source: Persisted extraction missing

No benchmark anchors detected.

Evidence snippet: The emergence of Large Language Models (LLMs) has illuminated the potential for a general-purpose user simulator.

Reported Metrics

missing

Not extracted

Confidence: Low Source: Persisted extraction missing

No metric anchors detected.

Evidence snippet: The emergence of Large Language Models (LLMs) has illuminated the potential for a general-purpose user simulator.

Rater Population

missing

Unknown

Confidence: Low Source: Persisted extraction missing

Rater source not explicitly reported.

Evidence snippet: The emergence of Large Language Models (LLMs) has illuminated the potential for a general-purpose user simulator.

Human Data Lens

  • Uses human feedback: No
  • Feedback types: None
  • Rater population: Unknown
  • Unit of annotation: Unknown
  • Expertise required: General
  • Extraction source: Persisted extraction

Evaluation Lens

  • Evaluation modes: Simulation Env
  • Agentic eval: Long Horizon
  • Quality controls: Not reported
  • Confidence: 0.40
  • Flags: ambiguous

Protocol And Measurement Signals

Benchmarks / Datasets

No benchmark or dataset names were extracted from the available abstract.

Reported Metrics

No metric terms were extracted from the available abstract.

Research Brief

Deterministic synthesis

However, existing benchmarks remain constrained to isolated scenarios, narrow action spaces, or synthetic data, failing to capture the holistic nature of authentic human behavior. HFEPX signals include Simulation Env, Long Horizon with confidence 0.40. Updated from current HFEPX corpus.

Generated Apr 10, 2026, 4:42 AM · Grounded in abstract + metadata only

Key Takeaways

  • However, existing benchmarks remain constrained to isolated scenarios, narrow action spaces, or synthetic data, failing to capture the holistic nature of authentic human behavior.
  • To bridge this gap, we introduce OmniBehavior, the first user simulation benchmark constructed entirely from real-world data, integrating long-horizon, cross-scenario, and…

Researcher Actions

  • Treat this as method context, then pivot to protocol-specific HFEPX hubs.
  • Identify benchmark choices from full text before operationalizing conclusions.
  • Verify metric definitions before comparing against your eval pipeline.

Caveats

  • Generated from title, abstract, and extracted metadata only; full-paper implementation details are not parsed.
  • Extraction confidence is probabilistic and should be validated for critical decisions.

Research Summary

Contribution Summary

  • However, existing benchmarks remain constrained to isolated scenarios, narrow action spaces, or synthetic data, failing to capture the holistic nature of authentic human behavior.
  • To bridge this gap, we introduce OmniBehavior, the first user simulation benchmark constructed entirely from real-world data, integrating long-horizon, cross-scenario, and heterogeneous behavioral patterns into a unified framework.
  • Based on this benchmark, we first provide empirical evidence that previous datasets with isolated scenarios suffer from tunnel vision, whereas real-world decision-making relies on long-term, cross-scenario causal chains.

Why It Matters For Eval

  • However, existing benchmarks remain constrained to isolated scenarios, narrow action spaces, or synthetic data, failing to capture the holistic nature of authentic human behavior.
  • To bridge this gap, we introduce OmniBehavior, the first user simulation benchmark constructed entirely from real-world data, integrating long-horizon, cross-scenario, and heterogeneous behavioral patterns into a unified framework.

Researcher Checklist

  • Gap: Human feedback protocol is explicit

    No explicit human feedback protocol detected.

  • Pass: Evaluation mode is explicit

    Detected: Simulation Env

  • Gap: Quality control reporting appears

    No calibration/adjudication/IAA control explicitly detected.

  • Gap: Benchmark or dataset anchors are present

    No benchmark/dataset anchor extracted from abstract.

  • Gap: Metric reporting is present

    No metric terms extracted.

Related Papers

Papers are ranked by protocol overlap, extraction signal alignment, and semantic proximity.

Need human evaluators for your AI research? Scale annotation with expert AI Trainers.