Counterfactual Analysis via Large Language Models

Counterfactual analysis aims to predict potential outcomes under hypothetical scenarios, offering valuable insights for decision-making. This paper investigates the application of large language models (LLMs), specifically the GPT-3.5 model, for counterfactual analysis. We focus on the online lending context, where the counterfactual return on investment (ROI) is crucial for evaluating different interest rate schemes. We begin by assessing the predictive performance of GPT and comparing it with advanced machine learning algorithms. The results show that prompt engineering can significantly enhance GPT's predictions, with the R-squared increasing from 1.97% to 2.84%, closely approaching the 3.48% achieved by gradient-boosted regression. Subsequently, we utilize GPT to generate counterfactual ROIs under a set of alternative interest rates. GPT exhibits logical coherence and causal reasoning in its responses. The findings underscore the potential of LLMs as effective tools for counterfactual analysis in online lending, suggesting broader applications for LLMs in various predictive and decision-making contexts.

From Caveman to Expert Analyst: Energy Consumption of Variable LLM Tasks

The energy demand growth and environmental impacts of artificial intelligence (AI) have generated substantial interest in supplying sufficient low-cost electricity for AI-driven data center development. Research on the ability of demand-side management to address these challenges has been more limited. Shifting the amount or timing of demand from retail, corporate, and other organizational behaviors is a plausible option but only if changes in demand-related behavior have important effects on the envi- ronmental and electricity effects of AI. This article tests four retail (i.e., consumer) user behaviors with high behavioral plasticity to assess their technical abatement potential. The research concludes that non- reasoning models provide sufficient quality while consuming close to one-twentieth of energy compared to reasoning models, saving an amount equal to the annual electricity requirement of at least 141,000 US households under daily usage assumptions. Simple prompt modifications can yield additional reduc- tions in energy consumption by up to 65% using non-reasoning models. Specifically, the practice that maintains the highest degree of similarity with the baseline reduces electricity demand in the range of 4 to 35%, an amount equal to the annual electricity requirement of up to 7,200 US households. Although AI advancements make precise estimates of environmental and electricity impacts difficult to assess, the results confirm that certain minimally intrusive best practices aimed at the majority of users can reduce the energy and environmental burdens imposed by AI.

Automated grading of Linux/bash examinations using large language models: a four-level cognitive taxonomy approach

Scalable and reliable grading of command-line examinations remains a challenge in computing education, where rising enrolments make manual marking difficult and rule-based autograders cannot handle partial credit, equivalent solutions, or syntactic variation. This paper evaluates whether four frontier Large Language Models (GPT, Claude Opus, Gemini, and GLM) can approximate expert judgment when grading short Linux/bash command responses. The study adopts a four-level cognitive taxonomy that combines cognitive complexity and operational impact, ranging from information retrieval (L1) and basic file manipulation (L2) to structural operations (L3) and advanced system management (L4). The models were tested with two prompt variants, a minimal baseline and a rubric-enhanced version, on 1200 real responses from second-year Computer Engineering students independently graded by three expert instructors. Gemini~3.0 Pro with rubric-guided prompting achieved the highest human-AI agreement (ICC(3,1) = 0.888, MAE = 0.10, Bland-Altman bias = -0.014). Agreement declined consistently as taxonomy level increased, with the largest discrepancies at higher levels. Across all models, rubric quality had a larger effect than provider choice, with structured prompts consistently improving agreement. These results show that question complexity is a reliable predictor of the difficulty LLMs face in grading accurately, and they establish a principled, taxonomy-based framework for determining which questions are suitable for AI-assisted grading and which require human review, while also providing a transferable evaluation protocol and prompt templates.