Ioana Buhnila

Ioana Buhnila, Georgeta Cislaru, Amalia Todirascu

Large Language Models (LLMs) have been used to generate texts in response to different writing tasks: reports, essays, story telling. However, language models do not have a meta-representation of the text writing process, nor inherent communication learning needs, comparable to those of young human students. This paper introduces a fine-grained linguistic and textual analysis of multilingual Small Language Models' (SLMs) writing. With our method, Chain-of-MetaWriting, SLMs can imitate some steps of the human writing process, such as planning and evaluation. We mainly focused on short story and essay writing tasks in French for schoolchildren and undergraduate students respectively. Our results show that SLMs encounter difficulties in assisting young students on sensitive topics such as violence in the schoolyard, and they sometimes use words too complex for the target audience. In particular, the output is quite different from the human produced texts in term of text cohesion and coherence regarding temporal connectors, topic progression, reference.

Ioana Buhnila, Aman Sinha, Mathieu Constant

Large Language Models (LLMs) have proven efficient in giving definition-type answers to user input queries. While for humans giving various types of answers, such as examples and paraphrases, is an easy task, LLMs struggle to provide correct answers for other than definition-type queries. In this study, we evaluated this drop in performance using TrackList, a fine-grained linguistic and statistical analysis pipeline to investigate the impact of the pre-training data on LLMs answers to diverse linguistic queries. We also introduce RefoMed-EN, an English dataset consisting of 6170 human-annotated medical terms alongside their corresponding definitions, denominations, exemplifications, explanations, or paraphrases. We studied whether the high frequency of a concept (head) or low frequency (tail) impacts the language model's performance. We evaluated the quality of the LLM's output using syntactic and semantic similarity metrics, statistical correlations and embeddings. Results showed that the LLM's task performance for definition type questions is the highest, while for the exemplification type it is the lowest. Additionally, we showed that for definition-type questions, large language models are prone to paraphrase more on popular and frequent knowledge and less on tail and technical knowledge, especially in the expert texts.