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.
Two full-journey rehearsals with 100 and 250 synthetic citizens validated the method and tooling.
AI classifies participants' stated reasons into five issues and returns them as material for the next deliberation round.
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.
100 synthetic citizens completed the full 13-stage journey. 97 finished, and 66% rated the AI-drafted alternative D as acceptable or conditionally acceptable.
First experiment record →The final configuration—250 citizens, a D-only third round, and the confirmed policy-variable constraints—was executed end to end.
Second experiment record →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. Unpublished policy proposals and internal operations materials are not included.
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.