Ronald Yurko

Swati Rallapalli, Shannon Gallagher, Ronald Yurko et al.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are now capable of generating highly fluent, human-like text. They enable many applications, but also raise concerns such as large scale spam, phishing, or academic misuse. While much work has focused on detecting LLM-generated text, only limited work has gone into understanding the stylistic differences between human-written and machine-generated text. In this work, we perform a large scale analysis of stylistic variation across human-written text and outputs from 11 LLMs spanning 8 different genres and 4 decoding strategies using Douglas Biber's set of lexicogrammatical and functional features. Our findings reveal insights that can guide intentional LLM usage. First, key linguistic differentiators of LLM-generated text seem robust to generation conditions (e.g., prompt settings to nudge them to generate human-like text, or availability of human-written text to continue the style); second, genre exerts a stronger influence on stylistic features than the source itself; third, chat variants of the models generally appear to be clustered together in stylistic space, and finally, model has a larger effect on the style than decoding strategy, with some exceptions. These results highlight the relative importance of model and genre over prompting and decoding strategies in shaping the stylistic behavior of machine-generated text.

Alex Reinhart, Ben Markey, Michael Laudenbach et al.

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.

Shannon K. Gallagher, Swati Rallapalli, Tyler Brooks et al.

Evolutionary methods have long been useful for analysis and explanation in genetics, biology, ecology, and related fields. In this work, we extend these methods to neural networks, specifically large language models (LLMs), to better analyze and explain relationships among models. We show how relating weights to genotypes and output text to phenotypes can improve our understanding of model lineage, important datasets, the roles of different model layers, and visualization of model relationships. We demonstrate this in a controlled experiment, where our estimated evolutionary trees reliably recover the topology of the ground-truth training tree. We further identify the most important weight layers according to weight differences and show through phenotypic experiments that one training dataset appears to contribute more useful information than the others. Finally, we generate an unsupervised evolutionary tree of black-box foundation models. Throughout, we provide visualizations that support a clearer understanding of evolutionary relationships among LLMs.