Can AI Agents Simulate A/B Test Outcomes? A Validation Framework for Agentic Experimentation
Abstract
A/B testing remains the standard for rolling out new features in the technology industry. Each experiment, however, consumes real traffic, engineering effort, and weeks of wall-clock time. Can AI agents—conditioned on behavioral profiles and contextual descriptions of the intervention—simulate outcomes accurately enough to vet candidate treatments before committing live traffic? We formalize this question as a Simulated Randomized Controlled Trial (S-RCT) and derive a two-layer error decomposition that separates agent approximation error from subsampling error, enabling targeted improvements to each. The framework is agent-agnostic: any behavioral model—from a fine-tuned specialist to a general-purpose foundation model—can serve as the simulation engine. Validated on 67 historical marketing A/B tests, a baseline S-RCT using an off-the-shelf foundation model captures directional signal (sign overlap 0.70) but systematically overshoots effect magnitudes. A two-phase pre-period calibration protocol reduces the squared prediction error (after removing irreducible measurement noise) by ∼77×; a within-subject design—where each agent is exposed to both arms—reduces standard errors by ∼2.4×. We discuss limitations of the current approach and identify applications where experimenters stand to benefit from agentic signals.