arXiv:2606. 29540v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) can leave subtle stylistic traces in assisted text; one of the most cited is the em-dash (Unicode U+2014).
By Przemys{\l}aw Czuma
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:2608. 16390v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: PDF corpora advertise their size in tokens but compute every rate they publish (coverage, OCR routing, re-fetch recovery, language mix) per document, and none decomposes its token total.
By Luca Foppiano
arXiv:2606. 05970v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models are increasingly used for structured extraction from clinical free-text notes, but the sensitivity of their output to upstream configuration choices is less understood than their accuracy on fixed benchmarks.
By Martin Murin
Accuracy changes after language-model self-revision are usually interpreted as changes in reasoning. We show this can fail at the answer-extraction boundary, and test the failure causally rather than only observationally.
arXiv:2607. 19257v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Practitioners make three prompt-design decisions with almost no controlled evidence behind them: how to format instructions and context (markdown, plain text, prose, or tabular), how many simultaneous instructions a system prompt can carry before compliance degrades, and how much context a model can hold before recall and honesty degrade.
By Netanel Eliav