Dante Donati

Lu Fang, Zhe Yuan, Kaifu Zhang et al.

We quantify the impact of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) on firm productivity through a series of large-scale randomized field experiments involving millions of users and products at a leading cross-border online retail platform. Over six months in 2023-2024, GenAI-based enhancements were integrated into seven consumer-facing business workflows. We find that GenAI adoption significantly increases sales, with treatment effects ranging from $0\%$ to $16.3\%$, depending on GenAI's marginal contribution relative to existing firm practices. Because inputs and prices were held constant across experimental arms, these gains map directly into total factor productivity improvements. Across the four GenAI applications with positive effects, the implied annual incremental value is approximately $\$ 5$ per consumer-an economically meaningful impact given the retailer's scale and the early stage of GenAI adoption. The primary mechanism operates through higher conversion rates, consistent with GenAI reducing frictions in the marketplace and improving consumer experience. We also document substantial heterogeneity: smaller and newer sellers, as well as less experienced consumers, exhibit disproportionately larger gains. Our findings provide novel, large-scale causal evidence on the productivity effects of GenAI in online retail, highlighting both its immediate value and broader potential.

Tianyi Peng, George Gui, Daniel J. Merlau et al.

Digital representations of individuals ("digital twins") promise to transform social science and decision-making. Yet it remains unclear whether such twins truly mirror the people they emulate. We conducted 19 preregistered studies with a representative U.S. panel and their digital twins, each constructed from rich individual-level data, enabling direct comparisons between human and twin behavior across a wide range of domains and stimuli (including never-seen-before ones). Twins reproduced individual responses with 75% accuracy and seemingly low correlation with human answers (approximately 0.2). However, this apparently high accuracy was no higher than that achieved by generic personas based on demographics only. In contrast, correlation improved when twins incorporated detailed personal information, even outperforming traditional machine learning benchmarks that require additional data. Twins exhibited systematic strengths and weaknesses - performing better in social and personality domains, but worse in political ones - and were more accurate for participants with higher education, higher income, and moderate political views and religious attendance. Together, these findings delineate both the promise and the current limits of digital twins: they capture some relative differences among individuals but not yet the unique judgments of specific people. All data and code are publicly available to support the further development and evaluation of digital twin pipelines.