Comparative study reveals large language models approximate human regional boundaries but overextend geographic limits, indicating human involvement remains essential in spatial cognition.
Recent advances in artificial intelligence have raised interest in using large language models (LLMs) as cost-efficient proxies for human participants. This paper explores their use in studies requiring place-specific knowledge. Drawing on Daniel Montello’s work on vague cognitive regions, we use Central Ohio as a case study comparing commercial and open-source LLM responses with human surveys. LLMs generally approximate human collective judgments of regional membership, though all models tend to overextend geographic boundaries. Newer commercial models show less response variability compared to humans. Persona prompts have little observable effect. Human involvement remains essential when integrating AI into spatial cognition research.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lin et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: