The paper examines whether existing automatic methods can reliably assess creativity in text produced by large language models (LLMs). By collecting human ratings on 11 creativity dimensions for both human and AI short stories, the authors compare these judgments with automated metrics and LLM-as-a-Judge evaluations. The results show a significant misalignment: automated metrics and LLM judges favor AI-generated stories and show near-zero correlation with human assessments, revealing fundamental limitations in current computational approaches to evaluating creative text.
By Alessandro Tutone, Giorgio Franceschelli, Mirco Musolesi
arXiv:2606. 04095v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Small open-weight models struggle at long-form creative writing: their generated stories either fall far short of the requested length, or their quality significantly degrades as length increases, especially when compared to frontier models.
By Rishanth Rajendhran, Jenna Russell, Mohit Iyyer, John Frederick Wieting
arXiv:2608.30754v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Evaluating creativity in large language model (LLM) outputs remains challenging because creativity is multidimensional and human-centered. We examine h...
By Mohammad Reza Modarres, Armin Tourajmehr, Yadollah Yaghoobzadeh, Mohammad Taher Pilehvar
However, whether these judges truly evaluate the scientific substance of ideas or are influenced by superficial stylistic presentation remains an open question. To address this question, we propose SciStyleBench, a unified three-component benchmark for diagnosing and mitigating stylistic bias in LLM-based idea evaluation: (i) First, SciStyleStage, a three-stage evaluation environment that applies controlled stylistic perturbations to fixed scientific content across three settings no context, fixed-domain context, and open-domain retrieval context, covering 600 scientific ideas and 15 style variants, with 9,000 evaluation instances per setting; (ii) Second, SciStyleMetrics, a set of quantitative measures, including Style Bias Index (SBI), Substance Recognition Rate (SRR), and Adversarial Win Rate (AWR), to characterize how stylistic variation affects scoring stability, substance discrimination, and ranking robustness; (iii) Third, SciStyleExtractor, a plug-and-play evaluation module that separates presentation style from scientific content by predicting style type and deviation before style-conditioned evaluation, enabling us to assess whether style awareness reduces stylistic bias.
arXiv:2609. 28245v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have shown strong performance in creative text generation, yet their ability to produce culturally grounded and stylistically constrained literary forms remains underexplored.
By AbdulRahman A. Morsy (Department of Computer Science, School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, George Washington University, Washington DC, United States), Aya Zirikly (Department of Computer Science, School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, George Washington University, Washington DC, United States, Center for Speech and Language Processing, Whiting School of Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore MD, United States)
arXiv:2608. 01666v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: However, whether these judges truly evaluate the scientific substance of ideas or are influenced by superficial stylistic presentation remains an open question.
By Fengxian Ji, Yuke Li, Jingpu Yang, Juanfan Wu, Fan Zhang, Zhexuan Cui, Yu Xie, Min Peng, Qianqian Xie, Xiuying Chen, Zhuohan Xie
The study investigates bias in large language model (LLM) judges by having ten LLMs evaluate narrative constraint selections rather than generated text. Results show that self-preference largely disappears under blind evaluation when quality and evaluator severity are controlled, but self- and other-labels alone shift scores bidirectionally when quality is matched. The authors conclude that authorship attribution drives evaluation bias and that open-ended, ground‑truth‑free tasks can effectively study LLM judge behavior.
By Songeun Chae, Min Kim, Donghoon Jung, Seojin Choi, Seohyon Jung
arXiv:2608. 12630v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: While large language models can generate entire novels, there is little information about the level of formal variation in their output over many generations.
By Mehdy Sedaghat Payam, Justin Quinn
Evaluating creativity in large language model (LLM) outputs remains challenging because creativity is multidimensional and human-centered. We examine how reliably LLMs evaluate short literary text in...
arXiv:2510. 20091v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Creativity is often seen as a hallmark of human intelligence.
By Zhaoyi Joey Hou, Bowei Alvin Zhang, Yining Lu, Bhiman Kumar Baghel, Anneliese Brei, Ximing Lu, Meng Jiang, Faeze Brahman, Snigdha Chaturvedi, Haw-Shiuan Chang, Daniel Khashabi, Xiang Lorraine Li
arXiv:2606. 01811v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Measuring the diversity of creative outputs is central to evaluating post-training mode collapse, comparing decoding strategies, and quantifying creative behavior in both AI and human writing.
By Matthew Khoriaty, David Williams-King, Shi Feng
arXiv:2606.26040v2 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: AI translation of literary works is increasingly common. While the content may be rendered adequately, we do not know enough about how readers expe...
By Yves Ferstler, Adam Podoxin, Ty Brassington, Ga\"elle Laperri\`ere, Roman Grundkiewicz, Marie-Jean Meurs, Maite Taboada, Marzena Karpinska