Synthetic linguistic data
Read the original on arXiv Computation and Language →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv Computation and Language.
The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv Computation and Language.
arXiv:2610.35029v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Synthetic data has become a common resource for training language models, and this trend has spilled over into research on developmentally plausible la...
The study examines how the geometric placement of synthetic data affects discourse‑pragmatic function classification. Using 410 annotated instances of the word "look" from the British National Corpus, synthetic examples were generated with Llama 3.1 and grouped by cosine distance from real data in RoBERTa space. Six training conditions were compared, showing that examples close to real data (NEAR) yield the largest macro‑F gain, while a distance‑balanced mix gives the highest accuracy, yet none improve AUC.
The paper presents a large‑scale empirical study of 284 interpretable linguistic features to detect AI‑generated English text across 30 language models and 10 text domains. It finds that classifiers using only linguistic features can reliably distinguish machine‑from human‑written text, but most indicators are highly context‑dependent. Only lexical richness measures consistently generalize across model families and domains, offering robust signals for detection.
arXiv:2606.05087v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Frequent verbs such as 'have' and 'make' can function either as collocates in light-verb constructions or as full lexical predicates, as in 'make a...
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.
The study examines how the geometric placement of synthetic data affects discourse-pragmatic function classification. Using 410 annotated instances of the word "look" and synthetic examples generated by Llama 3.1, the authors partitioned the synthetic data by cosine distance in RoBERTa space and compared six training conditions. While all augmentation conditions improved macro‑F and accuracy over a real‑only baseline, the nearest synthetic examples (NEAR) yielded the largest macro‑F gain (0.113) and a distance‑balanced mix achieved the highest accuracy (0.748), though none improved AUC.