The paper introduces TSS (Triple-Stream Stress probe), a diagnostic framework that splits text into lexical, morpho-syntactic, and psycholinguistic style channels to analyze mental health NLP classifiers. Across four English datasets, TSS uncovers a lexical interference effect where adding lexical features harms performance on human-labeled data but not on auto-labeled data, and proposes the Degree of Divergence (DoD) statistic to audit label-source bias. The study demonstrates that style features largely remain effective even after masking content words, emphasizing that shortcut learning is label-source specific rather than clinically relevant.
By Moustafa Yehia Hassan
arXiv:2604. 26269v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: In the era of large language models, creative writing quality lacks a computable theoretical anchor.
By Bo Zou, Chao Xu
arXiv:2608. 07208v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Existing measures of how much a text is about a concept read the surface of the text: dictionary word shares, topic proportions, embedding similarities.
By Luc Hazenoot, Zhaochun Ren, Amirhossein Zohrehvand
arXiv:2607. 20454v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: All frontier large language models (LLMs) exhibit response drift -- producing outputs that deviate from expert-validated references -- yet the magnitude and structure of this drift remain uncharacterised by systematic human evaluation.
By Mohammed Aledhari, Ali Aledhari, Fatimah Aledhari, Gowtham Venkat Eathamokkala, Mohamed Rahouti
A benchmark score means nothing without knowing what a trivial method achieves and what the best possible method could achieve. We construct both bounds for a task with a rare kind of ground truth: predicting which sentences a crowd of readers -- highlighting for their own purposes, unpaid, uninstructed, and blind to each other -- marked in 120 web documents.
The standard way to compare two text embeddings is cosine similarity. Scattered studies report that a different metric does better, but never pin down the geometric condition that decides when, or why.
arXiv:2608. 09093v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: How a document's arrangement is written down, its notation, is a training variable that no dataset card records.
By E. M. Freeburg
arXiv:2607. 04223v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) reduces but does not eliminate hallucination, and existing detectors return a single answer-level score that does not indicate which sentence is unsupported, or why.
By Mohamed Aly Bouke
arXiv:2607. 16741v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: B\"urger et al.
By Francesco Karim Vicidomini
arXiv:2608. 11415v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models are being proposed as agents in scientific workflows, in domains where no downstream verifier exists.
By Valentin Rodionov, Shamil Assylbekov
When many people highlight the same document, is the crowd a single consensus, or is it internally structured into reader sub-groups that mark different things -- and is that structure a stable property of a reader or of the document? Building on prior work showing an individual's within-document highlighting signal is a whisper while individuality lives in selection, we ask the group-level question on a co-readership platform using a margin-preserving curveball null.
The study investigates how demographic identity is represented in a language model, using representational similarity analysis against Pew survey data across 169 demographic cells. It finds that standard last‑token read‑outs underestimate the model’s fidelity, while specific attention heads (notably L11 H16) capture demographic structure more accurately, though race‑based types remain weak. Causal interventions reveal that high fidelity does not guarantee causal use, and a 128‑dimensional probe of a single head improves alignment with survey truth but fails to recover per‑question group ordering.