The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv Computation and Language.
The paper audits a 366‑day autobiographical book generated by a large language model (LLM) against an independent verification corpus. Using a four‑level rubric, 354 of the 366 days (96.7%) failed verification, with only 12 days containing corroborated scenes and 19 days containing actively contradicted claims. Regenerating the same days with current models yielded 100% verification failure, while grounding the generation in the subject’s own corpus improved the rate to 83.3% but still left substantial residual failure.
arXiv:2609.09243v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) grounds a language model in retrieved documents, which reduces hallucination but creates a new attack surface: i...
The paper introduces MONOLOGUE, a single‑document poisoning framework that uses logic hijacking to subtly alter Retrieval‑Augmented Generation (RAG) outputs without overt contradictions. Instead of directly refuting facts, MONOLOGUE frames updates as authoritative historical corrections, embedding counterfactuals into a grounded narrative. The method refines payloads offline through local multi‑dimensional gated optimization, combining text quality audits with surrogate behavioral verification, and demonstrates superior attack efficacy across multiple benchmarks, retrieval backends, and open‑weight generators.
The study examines how the rapid turnover of large language models (LLMs) undermines the effectiveness of AI‑detectors used to screen scientific manuscripts. By comparing 4,000 PNAS abstracts rewritten by 23 different LLM versions released between June 2023 and August 2026, the authors show that detectors trained on past versions can fail dramatically at generation boundaries, missing up to 96% of rewrites just after a sharp transition. Even detectors updated to newer versions can overlook rewrites of older models, and a commercial detector missed most rewrites of the newest version while flagging few human‑written abstracts.
arXiv:2609.06147v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Ask a language model the same question about the same document twenty times, and it sometimes returns two different answers. We built Probity, a benc...
arXiv:2608. 10216v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Agent frameworks ship quality gates that compare text blocks by embedding-cosine similarity and decide at a fixed cutoff.