REVIEW 3 cited by
Do LLMs write like humans? Variation in grammatical and rhetorical styles
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
Do LLMs write like humans? Variation in grammatical and rhetorical styles
read the original abstract
Large language models (LLMs) are capable of writing grammatical text that follows instructions, answers questions, and solves problems. As they have advanced, it has become difficult to distinguish their output from human-written text. While past research has found some differences in surface features such as word choice and punctuation, and developed classifiers to detect LLM output, none has studied the rhetorical styles of LLMs. Using several variants of Llama 3 and GPT-4o, we construct two parallel corpora of human- and LLM-written texts from common prompts. Using Douglas Biber's set of lexical, grammatical, and rhetorical features, we identify systematic differences between LLMs and humans and between different LLMs. These differences persist when moving from smaller models to larger ones, and are larger for instruction-tuned models than base models. This observation of differences demonstrates that despite their advanced abilities, LLMs struggle to match human stylistic variation. Attention to more advanced linguistic features can hence detect patterns in their behavior not previously recognized.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
Artificial Epanorthosis: Why large language models overuse a classical rhetorical figure, and how to mitigate it
LLMs overuse the 'not X, but Y' self-correction pattern in persuasive registers and underuse it in informal Q&A; a prompt or a detachable LoRA dial adjusts it to human levels.
-
How Human-Like Are Large Language Models? A Register-Aware Linguistic Evaluation Framework
The authors introduce a register-aware evaluation framework that compares LLM outputs to human reference corpora via Biber's lexico-grammatical features and MMD across five English registers.
-
How Human-Like Are Large Language Models? A Register-Aware Linguistic Evaluation Framework
A new evaluation framework using MMD on Biber features shows LLMs deviate from human linguistic distributions across registers, with closest models varying by register rather than size.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.