arXiv AI By Roland M\"uhlenbernd

Social Meaning in Large Language Models: Structure, Magnitude, and Pragmatic Prompting

Read the original on arXiv AI →

arXiv:2604. 02512v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) increasingly exhibit human-like patterns of pragmatic and social reasoning.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.

arXiv AI
Sep 10

Beliefs and Behavior in Language Models

arXiv:2609.07943v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: There is significant uncertainty about whether abstractions like beliefs or desires usefully describe the behavior of large language models (LLMs). In...

By Alex Smolin, Bryan Wilder
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 25

Polite but Misaligned: Evaluating LLM Politeness Judgments Against Human Pragmatic Norms

The paper investigates whether large language models (LLMs) assess politeness in ways that match human judgments. Using two English datasets—one with continuous ratings and another with three‑way categorical labels—the authors compare seven LLMs to human annotations. They find that models agree more with each other than with humans, show systematic neutral bias in categorical predictions, and that alignment varies with explicit linguistic cues and rapport‑building strategies.

By Rong Wang, Kun Sun, Yadong Guo
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Sep 24

Polite but Misaligned: Evaluating LLM Politeness Judgments Against Human Pragmatic Norms

The paper investigates whether large language models (LLMs) assess politeness in ways that match human judgments. Using two English datasets—one with continuous ratings and another with three‑way categorical labels—the authors find that LLMs agree more with each other than with humans. They observe that model–human alignment depends on explicit linguistic cues, while misaligned cases often involve rapport‑building strategies. Additionally, models tend to overproduce Neutral labels and underpredict Impolite labels, a pattern that persists even when expert consensus is used as a reference.