Can language models boost the power of randomized experiments without statistical bias?

Abstract: Randomized experiments or randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are gold standards for causal inference, yet cost and sample-size constraints limit power. Meanwhile, modern RCTs routinely collect rich, unstructured data that are highly prognostic of outcomes but rarely used in causal analyses. We introduce CALM (Causal Analysis leveraging LLMs), a statistical framework that integrates LLMs predictions with established causal estimators to increase precision while preserving statistical validity. CALM treats LLM outputs as auxiliary prognostic information and corrects their potential bias via a heterogeneous calibration step that residualizes and optimally reweights predictions. We prove that CALM remains consistent even when LLM predictions are biased and achieves efficiency gains over augmented inverse probability weighting estimators for various causal effects. In particular, CALM develops a few-shot variant that aggregates predictions across randomly sampled demonstration sets. The resulting U-statistic-like predictor restores i.i.d. structure and also mitigates prompt-selection variability. Empirically, in simulations calibrated to a mobile-app depression RCT, CALM delivers lower variance relative to other benchmarking methods, is effective in zero- and few-shot settings, and remains stable across prompt designs. By principled use of LLMs to harness unstructured data and external knowledge learned during pretraining, CALM provides a practical path to more precise causal analyses in RCTs.