Feb 2, 2026

LidaSim: Testing AI Policies With Persona-Based Simulations

Linh Le, David Williams-King, Arthur Colle

🏆 2nd Place Winner

We simulate well-known figures in AI and politics with agents, scraping large amounts of data to get realistic simulations. Then, we test questions and proposed policies against these public figures, to see which policies are more likely to be broadly supported. We focus on policies related to compute governance and hardware verification. We present a multi-agent simulation framework called LidaSim that orchestrates AI-powered agents to deliberate, debate, and vote on complex topics. Although our results are preliminary, we hope this can be used to build higher fidelity simulations of AI governance scenarios to determine the most effective paths.

Reviewer's Comments

Reviewer's Comments

Arrow
Arrow
Arrow
Arrow
Arrow

This is a really creative and well-executed project. LLM persona simulations to stress-test governance policies seem well worth explorting, and the write-up is clear and no-nonsense. I especially appreciate the detailed appendix.

Two suggestions for strengthening the work:

Try to synthesize the simulation results into higher-level insights. What do current simulation outcomes tell us about which policies would work? And are there generalizable insights into which properties make proposals workable?

The key open question for me is validation: are the simulation outcomes predictive, do they tell us something about which policies may actually succeed? I'm not sure how to best do it but backtesting seems like it might be worth a shot and results here would make it so much stronger as a project.

The team shows clear technical talent—building a complete multi-agent deliberation system with a polished UI in a hackathon timeframe is impressive. My main criticism is that the team did not persuasively argue for why (or under what conditions) it is valid to draw inferences about actual human responses from LLM simulations of those responses. It seems interesting to figure out what a reasonable methodology for doing so would look like.

Cite this work

@misc {

title={

(HckPrj) LidaSim: Testing AI Policies With Persona-Based Simulations

},

author={

Linh Le, David Williams-King, Arthur Colle

},

date={

2/2/26

},

organization={Apart Research},

note={Research submission to the research sprint hosted by Apart.},

howpublished={https://apartresearch.com}

}

Recent Projects

View All

View All

Feb 2, 2026

Prototyping an Embedded Off-Switch for AI Compute

This project prototypes an embedded off-switch for AI accelerators. The security block requires periodic cryptographic authorization to operate: the chip generates a nonce, an external authority signs it, and the chip verifies the signature before granting time-limited permission. Without valid authorization, outputs are gated to zero. The design was implemented in HardCaml and validated in simulation.

Read More

Feb 2, 2026

Fingerprinting All AI Cluster I/O Without Mutually Trusted Processors

We design and simulate a "border patrol" device for generating cryptographic evidence of data traffic entering and leaving an AI cluster, while eliminating the specific analog and steganographic side-channels that post-hoc verification can not close. The device eliminates the need for any mutually trusted logic, while still meeting the security needs of the prover and verifier.

Read More

Feb 2, 2026

Modelling the impact of verification in cross-border AI training projects

This paper develops a stylized game-theoretic model of cross-border AI training projects in which multiple states jointly train frontier models while retaining national control over compute resources. We focus on decentralized coordination regimes, where actors publicly pledge compute contributions but privately choose actual delivery, creating incentives to free-ride on a shared public good. To address this, the model introduces explicit verification mechanisms, represented as a continuous monitoring intensity that improves the precision of noisy signals about each actor's true compute contribution. Our findings suggest that policymakers designing international AI governance institutions face a commitment problem: half-measures in verification are counterproductive, and effective regimes require either accepting some free-riding or investing substantially in monitoring infrastructure.

Read More

This work was done during one weekend by research workshop participants and does not represent the work of Apart Research.
This work was done during one weekend by research workshop participants and does not represent the work of Apart Research.