arXiv ScienceSearch

arXiv · 2609.00345

Do LLMs Know Your Neighborhood? Auditing LLM Priors for Neighborhood-Level Mobility Prediction and Structural Alignment

Abstract

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.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Saad Mohammad Abrar, Eesha Kurella, Arnav Dadarya, Naman Awasthi, Kazi Tasnim Zinat, Vanessa Frias-Martinez. 2026-08-31. Do LLMs Know Your Neighborhood? Auditing LLM Priors for Neighborhood-Level Mobility Prediction and Structural Alignment. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.00345

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Can machines think efficiently?

The Turing Test is no longer adequate for distinguishing human and machine intelligence. With advanced artificial intelligence systems already passing the original Turing Test and contributing to serious ethical and environmental concerns, we urgently need to update the test. This work expands upon the original imitation game by accounting for an additional factor: the energy spent answering the questions. By adding the constraint of energy, the new test forces us to evaluate intelligence through the lens of efficiency, connecting the abstract problem of thinking to the concrete reality of finite resources. Further, this proposed new test ensures the evaluation of intelligence has a measurable, practical finish line that the original test lacks. This additional constraint compels society to weigh the time savings of using artificial intelligence against its total resource cost.

cs.LG

Classification Drives Geographic Bias in Street Scene Segmentation

Previous studies showed that image datasets lacking geographic diversity can lead to biased performance in models trained on them. While earlier work studied general-purpose image datasets (e.g., ImageNet) and simple tasks like image recognition, we investigated geo-biases in real-world driving datasets on a more complex task: instance segmentation. We examined if instance segmentation models trained on European driving scenes (Eurocentric models) are geo-biased. Consistent with previous work, we found that Eurocentric models were geo-biased. Interestingly, we found that geo-biases came from classification errors rather than localization errors, with classification errors alone contributing 10-90% of the geo-biases in segmentation and 19-88% of the geo-biases in detection. This showed that while classification is geo-biased, localization (including detection and segmentation) is geographically robust. Our findings show that in region-specific models (e.g., Eurocentric models), geo-biases from classification errors can be significantly mitigated by using coarser classes (e.g., grouping car, bus, and truck as 4-wheeler).

cs.CV

Reinforcement Learning and Rule-Based Peer-to-Peer Pricing in Residential PV-BES Communities

This paper compares rule-based and learning-based pricing mechanisms for peer-to-peer (P2P) electricity trading in residential photovoltaic communities. The rule-based benchmarks comprise bill-sharing as an ex post allocation mechanism, the mid-market rate, and supply-demand-ratio pricing. The reinforcement-learning (RL) formulation is implemented through a Deep Q-Network and evaluated under multiplier-based and learnable SDR-shaped pricing, with a fixed-parameter SDR variant as a non-learning control. Performance is assessed through community savings together with complementary financial and operational indicators. In the base PV-only configuration, the rule-based benchmarks outperform the best RL policy. With battery energy storage, evaluated for the RL policies only, community savings under the best RL policy increase from EUR 734.23 to EUR 978.52. Across the learning-based modes and in both configurations, SDR-shaped pricing outperforms the multiplier-based parameterization considered. The results indicate that rule-based pricing remains highly competitive wherever the two families are compared directly, and that storage substantially improves the learning-based outcomes under this accounting, while the distribution of benefits remains heterogeneous across households.

cs.LG