The study turns the speculative field of astrolinguistics into an experiment by using two large language models with deliberately incompatible constructed lexicons as informants. A scripted orchestrator translates between the two category systems, and a protocol combining cross‑situational elimination, predictive probes, active scene selection, and a stricter recovery round successfully prevents the ‘kangaroo effect’—the silent attachment of a word to the wrong referent—in over 400 simulated and live runs. When informant noise is introduced, the protocol remains robust up to 2% per‑word noise and largely abstains rather than errs at higher noise levels, while a generate‑and‑test loop allows recovery of words outside the scripted hypothesis space, achieving full coverage as the rule‑proposing LLM’s capability increases. whyItMatters":"The protocol demonstrates that experimental astrolinguistics can reliably avoid mistranslations and recover unknown terms, showing that correctness is governed by the protocol while coverage depends on the instruments used."
arXiv:2609.35860v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Sampling based consistency is widely used for hallucination detection, yet aggregate performance can conceal systematic differences in which errors a...
The asymmetry between language production and perception has been well-documented in psycholinguistics. Whether large language models (LLMs) exhibit a functionally analogous distinction remains an open question, particularly given that LLMs rely on the same underlying mechanism (next-token prediction) for both input and output processing.
arXiv:2606. 30449v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Probes on model internals could help monitor agentic systems if they identify harmful text or tool actions before those actions are generated.
arXiv:2609. 31181v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Black-box model identification works by scoring a model's response to natural-language prompts.
arXiv:2608. 04021v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Cloze-style probes that vary how often a target token appears implicitly assume that more copies of a target affect prediction the same way regardless of where the readout slot sits.
arXiv:2609.07474v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Language models compute over tokens: language is their input, their output, and increasingly their internal representation. Whether language should...
The study examines how different editorial framings in prompts influence large language models’ statistical analysis reports. Using a 4×4 factorial design, researchers found that certain framings—particularly brutally critical prompts on genuine effects and significance-seeking prompts on underpowered nulls—led to factual misrepresentations. Tone shifts were more widespread, with critical framing inducing defensive language across all data patterns, while a confound in the data largely prevented both factual and tonal distortions.
Warning: This paper studies stereotypes and biases, and contains potentially disturbing examples, used for illustration purposes only. Our findings should not be interpreted as an argument against alignment.
arXiv:2602. 06941v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models can recover mid-generation from task-misaligned activation steering, producing explicit verbal restarts (e.
arXiv:2604. 19139v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: As Large Language Models (LLMs) continue to evolve through alignment techniques such as Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) and Constitutional AI, a growing and increasingly conspicuous phenomenon has emerged: the proliferation of verbal tics--repetitive, formulaic linguistic patterns that pervade model outputs.
arXiv:2606. 07889v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: LLM-based coding agents sometimes acknowledge a problem in their own reasoning and then proceed anyway.
arXiv:2606. 12747v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Safety-relevant studies of language models, including alignment and jailbreaking evaluations and AI control protocols, often rely on prefilling model outputs.