Simplifications are Absolutists: How Simplified Language Reduces Word Sense Awareness in LLM-Generated Definitions

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2507.11981v1
• Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2025 07:25:27 GMT
• Title: Simplifications are Absolutists: How Simplified Language Reduces Word Sense Awareness in LLM-Generated Definitions
• Authors: Lukas Ellinger, Miriam Anschütz, Georg Groh,
• Abstract summary: We investigate how simplification impacts homonym definition quality across three target groups: Normal, Simple, and ELI5.<n>Our results show that simplification drastically degrades definition completeness by neglecting polysemy, increasing the risk of misunderstanding.<n>These findings highlight the need to balance simplicity and completeness in educational NLP to ensure reliable, context-aware definitions for all learners.
• Score: 2.6217304977339473
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) can provide accurate word definitions and explanations for any context. However, the scope of the definition changes for different target groups, like children or language learners. This is especially relevant for homonyms, words with multiple meanings, where oversimplification might risk information loss by omitting key senses, potentially misleading users who trust LLM outputs. We investigate how simplification impacts homonym definition quality across three target groups: Normal, Simple, and ELI5. Using two novel evaluation datasets spanning multiple languages, we test DeepSeek v3, Llama 4 Maverick, Qwen3-30B A3B, GPT-4o mini, and Llama 3.1 8B via LLM-as-Judge and human annotations. Our results show that simplification drastically degrades definition completeness by neglecting polysemy, increasing the risk of misunderstanding. Fine-tuning Llama 3.1 8B with Direct Preference Optimization substantially improves homonym response quality across all prompt types. These findings highlight the need to balance simplicity and completeness in educational NLP to ensure reliable, context-aware definitions for all learners.

Related papers

• It Depends: Resolving Referential Ambiguity in Minimal Contexts with Commonsense Knowledge [3.340255811686752]
  We investigate whether Large Language Models can leverage commonsense to resolve referential ambiguity in multi-turn conversations.<n>We test DeepSeek v3, GPT-4o, Qwen3-32B, GPT-4o-mini, and Llama-3.1-8B via LLM-as-Judge and human annotations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-19T15:49:26Z)
• Large Language Model Hacking: Quantifying the Hidden Risks of Using LLMs for Text Annotation [66.84286617519258]
  Large language models are transforming social science research by enabling the automation of labor-intensive tasks like data annotation and text analysis.<n>Such variation can introduce systematic biases and random errors, which propagate to downstream analyses and cause Type I (false positive), Type II (false negative), Type S (wrong sign), or Type M (exaggerated effect) errors.<n>We find that intentional LLM hacking is strikingly simple. By replicating 37 data annotation tasks from 21 published social science studies, we show that, with just a handful of prompt paraphrases, virtually anything can be presented as statistically significant.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-10T17:58:53Z)
• Uncovering the Fragility of Trustworthy LLMs through Chinese Textual Ambiguity [16.065963688326242]
  We study the trustworthiness of large language models (LLMs) when encountering ambiguous narrative text in Chinese.<n>We created a benchmark dataset by collecting and generating ambiguous sentences with context and their corresponding disambiguated pairs.<n>We discovered significant fragility in LLMs when handling ambiguity, revealing behavior that differs substantially from humans.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-30T21:50:19Z)
• Language Bottleneck Models: A Framework for Interpretable Knowledge Tracing and Beyond [55.984684518346924]
  We recast Knowledge Tracing as an inverse problem: learning the minimum natural-language summary that makes past answers explainable and future answers predictable.<n>Our Language Bottleneck Model (LBM) consists of an encoder LLM that writes an interpretable knowledge summary and a frozen decoder LLM that must reconstruct and predict student responses using only that summary text.<n> Experiments on synthetic arithmetic benchmarks and the large-scale Eedi dataset show that LBMs rival the accuracy of state-of-the-art KT and direct LLM methods while requiring orders-of-magnitude fewer student trajectories.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-20T13:21:14Z)
• Explain-then-Process: Using Grammar Prompting to Enhance Grammatical Acceptability Judgments [2.3749120526936465]
  Large language models (LLMs) can explain grammatical rules, yet they often fail to apply those rules when judging sentence acceptability.<n>We present "grammar prompting", an explain-then-process paradigm.<n> Feeding an LLM's metalinguistic explanation back to the target model bridges the gap between knowing a rule and using it.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-02T22:42:33Z)
• The Accuracy, Robustness, and Readability of LLM-Generated Sustainability-Related Word Definitions [0.6798775532273751]
  A common language with standardized definitions is crucial for effective climate discussions.<n>We compared 300 official IPCC glossary definitions with those generated by GPT-4o-mini, Llama3.1 8B, and Mistral 7B, analyzing adherence, robustness, and readability using SBERT sentence embeddings.<n>The LLMs scored an average adherence of $0.57-0.59 pm 0.15$, and their definitions proved harder to read than the originals.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-02T21:05:21Z)
• GIVE: Structured Reasoning of Large Language Models with Knowledge Graph Inspired Veracity Extrapolation [108.2008975785364]
  Graph Inspired Veracity Extrapolation (GIVE) is a novel reasoning method that merges parametric and non-parametric memories to improve accurate reasoning with minimal external input.<n>GIVE guides the LLM agent to select the most pertinent expert data (observe), engage in query-specific divergent thinking (reflect), and then synthesize this information to produce the final output (speak)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-11T03:05:06Z)
• Can large language models understand uncommon meanings of common words? [30.527834781076546]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown significant advancements across diverse natural language understanding (NLU) tasks. Yet, lacking widely acknowledged testing mechanisms, answering whether LLMs are parrots or genuinely comprehend the world' remains unclear. This paper presents innovative construction of a Lexical Semantic dataset with novel evaluation metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-09T12:58:22Z)
• FAC$^2$E: Better Understanding Large Language Model Capabilities by Dissociating Language and Cognition [56.76951887823882]
  Large language models (LLMs) are primarily evaluated by overall performance on various text understanding and generation tasks. We present FAC$2$E, a framework for Fine-grAined and Cognition-grounded LLMs' Capability Evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-29T21:05:37Z)
• Towards Realistic Zero-Shot Classification via Self Structural Semantic Alignment [53.2701026843921]
  Large-scale pre-trained Vision Language Models (VLMs) have proven effective for zero-shot classification. In this paper, we aim at a more challenging setting, Realistic Zero-Shot Classification, which assumes no annotation but instead a broad vocabulary. We propose the Self Structural Semantic Alignment (S3A) framework, which extracts structural semantic information from unlabeled data while simultaneously self-learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-24T17:56:46Z)
• Simple Linguistic Inferences of Large Language Models (LLMs): Blind Spots and Blinds [59.71218039095155]
  We evaluate language understanding capacities on simple inference tasks that most humans find trivial. We target (i) grammatically-specified entailments, (ii) premises with evidential adverbs of uncertainty, and (iii) monotonicity entailments. The models exhibit moderate to low performance on these evaluation sets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-24T06:41:09Z)
• Using Natural Language Explanations to Rescale Human Judgments [81.66697572357477]
  We propose a method to rescale ordinal annotations and explanations using large language models (LLMs)<n>We feed annotators' Likert ratings and corresponding explanations into an LLM and prompt it to produce a numeric score anchored in a scoring rubric.<n>Our method rescales the raw judgments without impacting agreement and brings the scores closer to human judgments grounded in the same scoring rubric.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-24T06:19:14Z)
• Dancing Between Success and Failure: Edit-level Simplification Evaluation using SALSA [21.147261039292026]
  We introduce SALSA, an edit-based human annotation framework. We develop twenty one linguistically grounded edit types, covering the full spectrum of success and failure. We develop LENS-SALSA, a reference-free automatic simplification metric, trained to predict sentence- and word-level quality simultaneously.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-23T18:30:49Z)
• We're Afraid Language Models Aren't Modeling Ambiguity [136.8068419824318]
  Managing ambiguity is a key part of human language understanding. We characterize ambiguity in a sentence by its effect on entailment relations with another sentence. We show that a multilabel NLI model can flag political claims in the wild that are misleading due to ambiguity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-27T17:57:58Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.