Interpretable Stylistic Variation in Human and LLM Writing Across Genres, Models, and Decoding Strategies

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.14111v1
• Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2026 17:31:21 GMT
• Title: Interpretable Stylistic Variation in Human and LLM Writing Across Genres, Models, and Decoding Strategies
• Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) are now capable of generating highly fluent, human-like text.<n>LLMs enable many applications, but also raise concerns such as large scale spam, phishing, or academic misuse.<n>We perform a large scale analysis of stylistic variation across human-written text and outputs from 11 LLMs.
• Score: 0.34202935599316525
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: 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.

Related papers

• See the Text: From Tokenization to Visual Reading [63.10220471118435]
  SeeTok renders text as images (visual-text) and leverages pretrained multimodal computations to interpret them.<n>Across three different language tasks, SeeTok matches or surpasses subword tokenizers while requiring 4.43 times fewer tokens and reducing FLOPs by 70.5%.<n>SeeTok signals a shift from symbolic tokenization to human-like visual reading, and takes a step toward more natural and cognitively inspired language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-21T17:34:48Z)
• StyleDecipher: Robust and Explainable Detection of LLM-Generated Texts with Stylistic Analysis [18.44456241158174]
  StyleDecipher is a robust and explainable detection framework.<n>It revisits text detection using combined feature extractors to quantify stylistic differences.<n>It consistently achieves state-of-the-art in-domain accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-14T15:07:27Z)
• Linguistic and Embedding-Based Profiling of Texts generated by Humans and Large Language Models [0.2522193309965572]
  We calculate different linguistic features such as dependency length and emotionality for characterizing human-written and machine-generated texts.<n>Our statistical analysis reveals that human-written texts tend to exhibit simpler syntactic structures and more diverse semantic content.<n>Both human- and machine-generated texts show stylistic diversity across domains, with human-written texts displaying greater variation in our features.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-18T02:46:55Z)
• Feature-Level Insights into Artificial Text Detection with Sparse Autoencoders [20.557610461777344]
  We use Sparse Autoencoders (SAE) to extract features from Gemma-2-2b residual stream.<n>We identify both interpretable and efficient features, analyzing their semantics and relevance.<n>Our methods offer valuable insights into how texts from various models differ from human-written content.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-05T15:33:52Z)
• Beyond Profile: From Surface-Level Facts to Deep Persona Simulation in LLMs [50.0874045899661]
  We introduce CharacterBot, a model designed to replicate both the linguistic patterns and distinctive thought patterns as manifested in the textual works of a character.<n>Using Lu Xun, a renowned Chinese writer as a case study, we propose four training tasks derived from his 17 essay collections.<n>These include a pre-training task focused on mastering external linguistic structures and knowledge, as well as three fine-tuning tasks.<n>We evaluate CharacterBot on three tasks for linguistic accuracy and opinion comprehension, demonstrating that it significantly outperforms the baselines on our adapted metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-18T16:11:54Z)
• Human Variability vs. Machine Consistency: A Linguistic Analysis of Texts Generated by Humans and Large Language Models [0.0]
  We identify significant differences between human-written texts and those generated by large language models (LLMs)<n>Our findings indicate that humans write texts that are less cognitively demanding, with higher semantic content, and richer emotional content compared to texts generated by LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-04T04:38:35Z)
• Detecting Machine-Generated Long-Form Content with Latent-Space Variables [54.07946647012579]
  Existing zero-shot detectors primarily focus on token-level distributions, which are vulnerable to real-world domain shifts. We propose a more robust method that incorporates abstract elements, such as event transitions, as key deciding factors to detect machine versus human texts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-04T18:42:09Z)
• Inclusivity in Large Language Models: Personality Traits and Gender Bias in Scientific Abstracts [49.97673761305336]
  We evaluate three large language models (LLMs) for their alignment with human narrative styles and potential gender biases. Our findings indicate that, while these models generally produce text closely resembling human authored content, variations in stylistic features suggest significant gender biases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-27T19:26:11Z)
• ReMoDetect: Reward Models Recognize Aligned LLM's Generations [55.06804460642062]
  Large language models (LLMs) generate human-preferable texts. In this paper, we identify the common characteristics shared by these models. We propose two training schemes to further improve the detection ability of the reward model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-27T17:38:33Z)
• The Imitation Game: Detecting Human and AI-Generated Texts in the Era of ChatGPT and BARD [3.2228025627337864]
  We introduce a novel dataset of human-written and AI-generated texts in different genres. We employ several machine learning models to classify the texts. Results demonstrate the efficacy of these models in discerning between human and AI-generated text.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-22T21:00:14Z)
• MAGE: Machine-generated Text Detection in the Wild [82.70561073277801]
  Large language models (LLMs) have achieved human-level text generation, emphasizing the need for effective AI-generated text detection. We build a comprehensive testbed by gathering texts from diverse human writings and texts generated by different LLMs. Despite challenges, the top-performing detector can identify 86.54% out-of-domain texts generated by a new LLM, indicating the feasibility for application scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-22T17:13:29Z)

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.