The study demonstrates that text produced by large language models (LLMs) leaves a distinct stylometric footprint—primarily increased entropy and lexical diversity—across multiple models and domains. In contrast, AI editing of human text does not replicate this footprint; edited texts show only modest lexical diversity gains and reduced entropy, with lexical density emerging as the key distinguishing feature. Consequently, stylometric analysis can differentiate AI-generated from AI-edited content, but is less effective at distinguishing either from purely human writing.
By Zhengyang Shan, Yukyung Lee, Sophie Hao
arXiv:2609.15369v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Word-level detectors identify unedited AI-generated text almost perfectly, but the literature documents their brittleness under rewording, and a word-l...
By Jochen Madler (Sitefire)
arXiv:2606. 04177v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Interpretable linguistic features offer a promising approach for explaining why a given text appears machine-generated, particularly for non-expert users.
By Yassir El Attar, Esra D\"onmez, Maximilian Maurer, Agnieszka Falenska
Large language models (LLMs) are widely used to assist writing, but this study shows they alter both tone and meaning of human text. A user study found that heavy LLM use increased neutral essays by nearly 70% and made writers feel less creative and less in their voice. Even when prompted to make only grammar edits, LLMs changed the semantic content of essays and produced AI-generated scientific reviews that were less focused on clarity and significance and scored higher on average.
By Marwa Abdulhai, Isadora White, Yanming Wan, Ibrahim Qureshi, Joel Z. Leibo, Max Kleiman-Weiner, Natasha Jaques
arXiv:2605. 29223v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: The parameter counts of the most widely used large language models (LLMs) are often withheld by their developers, leaving model size -- a primary reference point for interpreting capabilities and costs -- largely undisclosed.
By Ivica Nikolic
arXiv:2409. 01754v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: From the printing press to social media, innovations in communication technology have repeatedly reshaped how ideas spread through human culture.
By Hiromu Yakura, Ezequiel Lopez-Lopez, Levin Brinkmann, Ignacio de la Serna, Lara Kirfel, Prateek Gupta, Ivan Soraperra, Thomas F. Eisenmann, Dirk U. Wulff, Iyad Rahwan
The paper introduces a register-aware framework to evaluate how human-like large language models (LLMs) are, focusing on linguistic feature distributions rather than factual correctness. It uses Maximum Mean Discrepancy (MMD) and 67 Biber lexico‑grammatical features to compare LLM‑generated texts with human reference corpora across different registers. Experiments on seven instruction‑tuned, open‑source models across five English datasets show that all LLMs deviate from human baselines, with closeness to human language varying by register and not by model size.
By Bj\"orn Nieth, Marianna Gracheva, Michaela Mahlberg, Bjoern Eskofier, Emmanuelle Salin
arXiv:2608. 10715v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Over the past several years, LLM-powered chatbots and agents have become widely used as a tool for academic writing.
By Lena Holzwarth, Rita Gonz\'alez-M\'arquez, Dmitry Kobak
arXiv:2603. 18482v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Standard decoding strategies for text generation, including top-$k$, nucleus sampling, and contrastive search, select tokens based on likelihood, restricting outputs to high-probability regions.
By Esteban Garces Arias, Nurzhan Sapargali, Christian Heumann, Matthias A{\ss}enmacher
CHRONOBERG is a temporally structured corpus of English book texts covering 250 years, curated from Project Gutenberg and enriched with temporal annotations. It enables quantification of lexical semantic change via time‑sensitive Valence‑Arousal‑Dominance analysis and the creation of historically calibrated affective lexicons. Experiments show that language models trained sequentially on CHRONOBERG struggle to encode diachronic shifts, highlighting the need for temporally aware training and evaluation pipelines.
By Niharika Hegde, Subarnaduti Paul, Lars Joel-Frey, Manuel Brack, Kristian Kersting, Martin Mundt, Patrick Schramowski
The paper investigates training‑free detection of machine‑generated text using spectral analysis. It shows that spectral energy correlates with variance in token probability trajectories and that human writing produces characteristic fluctuations, termed "generative vitality." The authors find that spectral signals are strongest for long, continuous, constrained generations, while shorter or mixed texts require additional confidence‑based metrics.
By Haitong Luo, Xuying Meng, Weiyao Zhang, Wenji Zou, Shengfeng Lou, Xuefeng Jiang, Chungang Lin, Yujun Zhang
arXiv:2604.08568v3 Announce Type: replace-cross
Abstract: The widespread use of LLM-based writing assistance has raised an interesting question about the homogenization of English. As LLMs tend to re...
By Nabelanita Utami, Ryohei Sasano