LLM-Based Social Simulations Require a Boundary

This position paper argues that large language model (LLM)-based social simulations should establish clear boundaries to meaningfully contribute to social science research. While LLMs offer promising capabilities for modeling human-like agents compared to traditional agent-based modeling, they face fundamental limitations that constrain their reliability for social pattern discovery. The core issue lies in LLMs' tendency towards an ``average persona'' that lacks sufficient behavioral heterogeneity, a critical requirement for simulating complex social dynamics. We examine three key boundary problems: alignment (simulated behaviors matching real-world patterns), consistency (maintaining coherent agent behavior over time), and robustness (reproducibility under varying conditions). We propose heuristic boundaries for determining when LLM-based simulations can reliably advance social science understanding. We believe that these simulations are more valuable when focusing on (1) collective patterns rather than individual trajectories, (2) agent behaviors aligning with real population averages despite limited variance, and (3) proper validation methods available for testing simulation robustness. We provide a practical checklist to guide researchers in determining the appropriate scope and claims for LLM-based social simulations.