Linguistic Monoculture in LLM-Assisted Language Use

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.27134v1
• Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 17:04:36 GMT
• Title: Linguistic Monoculture in LLM-Assisted Language Use
• Abstract summary: We develop a mathematical framework in which authors and large language models are represented as distributions over linguistic features.<n>We characterize the resulting equilibria and convergence rates, showing that, shared models can drive authors toward a common norm.<n>We then endogenize conformity as a strategic choice trading off private benefits from clarity, legibility, and perceived fluency against distinctive style.
• Score: 6.525195905471158
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Writing and communication are increasingly mediated by large language models (LLMs) that are being used to draft, revise and polish text. Although such assistance can improve clarity and help authors meet institutional expectations, widespread reliance on shared models may reduce population-level variation in linguistic form, a phenomenon we refer to as linguistic monoculture. We develop a mathematical framework in which authors and LLMs are represented as distributions over linguistic features and coevolve through repeated interaction. We analyze three interaction mechanisms: a shared model with a fixed linguistic distribution, a shared model recursively updated from author outputs, and personalized models updated through author-specific and population-level feedback. We characterize the resulting equilibria and convergence rates, showing that, shared models can drive authors toward a common norm, recursive feedback relocates the shared norm without altering pairwise spread under common conformity, and personalization can preserve a family of distinct author-model equilibria with nonzero linguistic diversity. We then endogenize conformity as a strategic choice trading off private benefits from clarity, legibility, and perceived fluency against distinctive style. Within this utility model, individually rational authors may conform more than is socially optimal because they do not internalize the value their distinctiveness provides to others, creating a negative externality and a price of monoculture that is finite for each fixed instance but can grow without bound when distinctiveness dominates authenticity. Synthetic simulations illustrate how fixed shared assistance, recursive feedback, and personalization produce different long-run diversity outcomes.

Related papers

• Interpretable and Fair Generalized Additive Neural Networks via Multi-objective Learning [52.66717986145448]
  Interpretability and fairness are two of the most emphasized dimensions in trustworthy artificial intelligence (AI)<n>This paper focuses on neural network (NN)-based generalized additive models (GAMs), a class of self-interpretable models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-05T07:29:42Z)
• When the Feature Pool Goes Algorithmic: Extending Mufwene's Ecology of Language Evolution to LLM-Mediated Exposure [0.0]
  Mufwene's ecological model locates language evolution in competition among variants contributed by individual idiolects.<n>Large language models (LLMs) complicate this architecture without requiring the locus of selection to move away from human speakers.<n>I call the resulting ecological process algorithmic reweighting of the speaker-accessible distribution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-21T13:32:26Z)
• LVRPO: Language-Visual Alignment with GRPO for Multimodal Understanding and Generation [51.071351994330605]
  Unified multimodal pretraining has emerged as a promising paradigm for jointly modeling language and vision within a single foundation model.<n>Existing approaches largely rely on implicit or indirect alignment signals and remain suboptimal for simultaneously supporting multimodal understanding and generation.<n>We propose LVRPO, a language-visual reinforcement-based preference optimization framework that explicitly aligns language and visual representations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-29T13:38:21Z)
• Syntax-Guided Diffusion Language Models with User-Integrated Personalization [1.202131801903952]
  Large language models have made revolutionary progress in generating human-like text, yet their outputs often tend to be generic.<n>Recent advances in diffusion models have opened new opportunities for improving language generation beyond the limitations of autoregressive paradigms.<n>We propose a syntax-guided diffusion language model that integrates structural supervision and personalized conditioning to enhance text quality, diversity, and controllability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-01T15:33:12Z)
• Modeling Open-World Cognition as On-Demand Synthesis of Probabilistic Models [93.1043186636177]
  We explore the hypothesis that people use a combination of distributed and symbolic representations to construct bespoke mental models tailored to novel situations.<n>We propose a computational implementation of this idea -- a Model Synthesis Architecture''<n>We evaluate our MSA as a model of human judgments on a novel reasoning dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-16T18:01:03Z)
• Evaluating the Diversity and Quality of LLM Generated Content [72.84945252821908]
  We introduce a framework for measuring effective semantic diversity--diversity among outputs that meet quality thresholds.<n>Although preference-tuned models exhibit reduced lexical and syntactic diversity, they produce greater effective semantic diversity than SFT or base models.<n>These findings have important implications for applications that require diverse yet high-quality outputs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-16T23:02:23Z)
• Evaluating book summaries from internal knowledge in Large Language Models: a cross-model and semantic consistency approach [0.0]
  We study the ability of large language models (LLMs) to generate comprehensive and accurate book summaries.<n>We examine whether these models can synthesize meaningful narratives that align with established human interpretations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-27T15:36:24Z)
• The Shrinking Landscape of Linguistic Diversity in the Age of Large Language Models [7.811355338367627]
  We show that the widespread adoption of large language models (LLMs) as writing assistants is linked to notable declines in linguistic diversity.<n>We show that while the core content of texts is retained when LLMs polish and rewrite texts, not only do they homogenize writing styles, but they also alter stylistic elements in a way that selectively amplifies certain dominant characteristics or biases while suppressing others.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-16T20:51:07Z)
• Collapsed Language Models Promote Fairness [88.48232731113306]
  We find that debiased language models exhibit collapsed alignment between token representations and word embeddings.<n>We design a principled fine-tuning method that can effectively improve fairness in a wide range of debiasing methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-06T13:09:48Z)
• Political Bias in LLMs: Unaligned Moral Values in Agent-centric Simulations [0.0]
  We investigate how personalized language models align with human responses on the Moral Foundation Theory Questionnaire.<n>We adapt open-source generative language models to different political personas and repeatedly survey these models to generate synthetic data sets.<n>Our analysis reveals that models produce inconsistent results across multiple repetitions, yielding high response variance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-21T08:20:41Z)
• Language Model Evaluation Beyond Perplexity [47.268323020210175]
  We analyze whether text generated from language models exhibits the statistical tendencies present in the human-generated text on which they were trained. We find that neural language models appear to learn only a subset of the tendencies considered, but align much more closely with empirical trends than proposed theoretical distributions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-31T20:13:44Z)

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.