Expert Alternatives
The policy research team studies problems, evidence, reform alternatives, and constraints.
This is AIPOL's first use case, connecting policy experts' pension-reform alternatives, synthetic-citizen responses, AI-generated additional alternatives, and human review.
Research question
Designing and validating the roles of humans and AI for pension reform, which intertwines intergenerational interests, long-term finances, retirement income, and system trust.
The policy research team studies problems, evidence, reform alternatives, and constraints.
100 synthetic-citizen personas record judgments and conditions for each expert alternative.
Structuring not only participants' choices but also conditions, concerns, and reasons for opposition.
AI proposes based on opinions, while humans review, modify, and approve.
Development record
Methodology and execution paths are verified with synthetic data prior to real-world application, distinguishing results from actual public opinion.
Review the professor-provided flow—pre-survey, first ballot, AI diagnosis and small-group discussion, then the second and final ballot—inside this pension reform case. Policy figures and analytical copy remain pending expert approval.
Open the pension experiment preview →Structure linking evidence, expert alternatives, synthetic responses, AI proposals, and human approval.
Expert pension proposals and fiscal assumptions were entered; the engine ran and recorded two response rounds from 100 model-generated personas and an AI-generated additional option. This did not validate real acceptance, public opinion, representativeness, behaviour, deliberative effects, policy effects, or the legitimacy of any pension proposal.
View synthetic simulation pre-verification →Policy experiments will be conducted with a real audience at the Korean Association for Policy Studies flagship session.
Event Info →What will be shared
Leave materials for reuse and critique by other research, rather than a single policy conclusion.
Policy development stages and human-AI roles.
Model, version, input, and review criteria.
Research engine and online/on-site participation tools.
Framing, sample, errors, and unaddressed issues.