Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Step-Back Profiling: Distilling User History for Personalized Scientific Writing

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2406.14275 v2 pith:6B2SWPML submitted 2024-06-20 cs.CL cs.AI

Step-Back Profiling: Distilling User History for Personalized Scientific Writing

classification cs.CL cs.AI
keywords scientificwritingpersonalizationpersonalizedprofilingstep-backuserdataset
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Large language models (LLM) excel at a variety of natural language processing tasks, yet they struggle to generate personalized content for individuals, particularly in real-world scenarios like scientific writing. Addressing this challenge, we introduce STEP-BACK PROFILING to personalize LLMs by distilling user history into concise profiles, including essential traits and preferences of users. To conduct the experiments, we construct a Personalized Scientific Writing (PSW) dataset to study multi-user personalization. PSW requires the models to write scientific papers given specialized author groups with diverse academic backgrounds. As for the results, we demonstrate the effectiveness of capturing user characteristics via STEP-BACK PROFILING for collaborative writing. Moreover, our approach outperforms the baselines by up to 3.6 points on the general personalization benchmark (LaMP), including 7 personalization LLM tasks. Our ablation studies validate the contributions of different components in our method and provide insights into our task definition. Our dataset and code are available at \url{https://github.com/gersteinlab/step-back-profiling}.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. "Pragmatic Tools or Empowering Friends?" Discovering and Co-Designing Personality-Aligned AI Writing Companions

    cs.HC 2025-09 conditional novelty 5.0

    Writers grouped into four MBTI-based profiles showed divergent preferences for AI writing companion features, demonstrated by two contrasting prototypes in a small proof-of-concept study.

  2. What Makes an AI Writing Companion a Good Fit? A Personality-Informed Co-Design Study

    cs.HC 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    Co-design workshops reveal both universal needs and personality-specific preferences for AI writing companions in functionality, interaction style, and visual form.