Searcharxiv⌕ Search

EXPLORE THE ARCHIVE

Language models

Explore arXiv papers about language models. Read abstracts, discover authors and related research, and follow the original paper for methods, results, and the latest version.

1,840 records · Page 4Linked to original sources
arXiv2026

How Human-Like Are Large Language Models? A Register-Aware Linguistic Evaluation Framework

While factual correctness and task-performance have been in focus of Large Language Model (LLM) research for a long time, the fundamental question of how human-like generated texts are on a linguistic level has been underexplored. From a corpus-linguistic perspective, language production is inherently context-dependent, with distinct communicative contexts giving rise to differences in frequencies and co-occurrence patterns of linguistic features. A text failing to adhere to these patterns can be content-wise correct, but still be unfavorable to human readers. In this work, we propose a context-aware evaluation framework in which human-likeness is assessed using a two-sample problem between the linguistic feature distribution of a human reference corpus for a given register and a corresponding LLM-generated corpus. We implement this framework using the Maximum Mean Discrepancy (MMD) and the 67 lexico-grammatical features introduced by Biber, which are commonly applied in corpus linguistics. In our experiments, we compare seven instruction-tuned, open-source models across five English-language datasets spanning distinct registers against a human baseline. While across all tested setups, LLMs deviate from the human baseline, which models are closest to human language depends on the register and is not dictated by model size.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

Pruning Laws for Large Language Models

Scaling up model parameters and training data consistently improves the performance of large language models (LLMs), but at the cost of rapidly growing memory and compute requirements, which makes deployment on resource-limited hardware infeasible. Model pruning, a widely used compression technique, reduces inference costs by removing redundant parameters. However, its impact on downstream performance remains unpredictable and is typically assessed only through costly empirical sweeps. To address this gap, we introduce pruning laws, simple and interpretable scaling relations that connect a pruned LLM's post-pruning performance to its unpruned performance and pruning ratio. Across ten LLMs (1.3B-30B parameters), a 20B mixture-of-experts model, three pruning strategies (unstructured, width, and depth), and eight diverse tasks, we show that pruning laws achieve strong predictive accuracy (average extrapolation error less than 7%), reliably quantify performance degradation, and identify critical pruning thresholds beyond which recovery is infeasible. Moreover, we demonstrate that the functional form transfers across dense and mixture-of-experts architectures, pruning methods, and unseen models in zero-shot and one-shot setups, with task- and method-specific coefficients that vary in interpretable ways. These results provide both researchers and practitioners with a principled framework to select pruning strategies, estimate safe pruning ratios without exhaustive tuning, and deploy LLMs efficiently under real-world compute and latency constraints.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

Detecting Hidden Chain-of-Thought in Large Language Models with Linguistic, Behavioral, and Mechanistic Indicators

Large language models often answer complex reasoning questions without revealing intermediate steps, raising whether they reason latently or complete patterns. We propose the Hidden CoT Detection Score (HCDS), a comparative behavioral and mechanistic signal measuring whether neutral-prompt behavior aligns more closely with explicit CoT or explicit no- CoT. Here, hidden CoT operationally denotes this neutral-prompt CoT-like alignment; HCDS does not directly observe or prove an unexposed reasoning trace. On GSM8K, HCDS is significantly positive for both Qwen3-4B variants (Thinking $+1.87$, $p = 1.2 \times 10^{-7}$; Instruct $+1.41$, $p = 1.9 \times 10^{-4}$), replicates across a different inference stack and quantization within $0.08$ ($+1.80$ and $+1.45$), and is not significantly positive in seven of eight length-adjusted calibration-control cells. The unadjusted score produces large positive scores on single-step arithmetic and numeric factual lookup. The variants also respond differently to no-CoT instructions: Instruct complies from the prompt alone, whereas Thinking continues reasoning and requires intervention. These findings show stronger, less prompt-conditional CoT-like behavior in the reasoning-tuned model, consistent with but not proof of latent reasoning. HCDS thus investigates latent reasoning without relying on models' self-reported traces.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

Do Large Language Models Possess a Theory of Mind? A Comparative Evaluation Using the Strange Stories Paradigm

The study explores whether current Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit Theory of Mind (ToM) capabilities -- specifically, the ability to infer others' beliefs, intentions, and emotions from text. Given that LLMs are trained on language data without social embodiment or access to other manifestations of mental representations, their apparent social-cognitive reasoning raises key questions about the nature of their understanding. Are they capable of robust mental-state attribution indistinguishable from human ability in its output, or do their outputs merely reflect superficial pattern completion? To address this question, we tested five LLMs and compared their performance to that of human controls using an adapted version of a text-based tool widely used in human ToM research. The test involves answering questions about the beliefs, intentions, and emotions of story characters. The results revealed a performance gap between the models. Earlier and smaller models were strongly affected by the number of relevant inferential cues available and, to some extent, were also vulnerable to the presence of irrelevant or distracting information in the texts. In contrast, GPT-4o demonstrated high accuracy and strong robustness, performing comparably to humans even in the most challenging conditions. This work contributes to ongoing debates about the cognitive status of LLMs and the boundary between genuine understanding and statistical approximation.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

Do large language models scrutinise what they review? A multimodal audit of scoring calibration, error detection, and author-identity effects

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to generate peer reviews, prompting examination of their capacity for critical evaluation. This study evaluates two multimodal LLMs, Qwen2.5-VL-72B and Pixtral-Large-124B, as reviewers across 165 submissions to the 2026 International Conference on Learning Representations, a venue that postdates both models' training cutoffs. Manuscripts were presented to both models with author identities blinded, replaced with high-prestige affiliations, or replaced with low-prestige affiliations, and in either text-only or text-with-figure format. Additionally, 145 verifiably detectable errors were inserted into 55 manuscripts to assess error identification under natural and verification-oriented prompts. Across all manuscript groups, including rejected submissions, LLM scores ranged from 7.0 to 8.1, whereas human mean scores ranged from 3.4 to 6.8. The models detected 12.1\% of the verified errors under natural prompting, and a one-sentence verification instruction increased detection to 22.2\%; however, 78\% of the errors remained undetected. Providing figures reduced error detection while increasing review scores. No visual error was reliably verified against its corresponding figure, and half of the text-only reviews described figures that were not provided. Author identity did not influence either review scores or error detection. LLM editorial decisions exactly matched those produced by simple score averaging.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

Mechanistic Diagnostics of Spatial Lexical Bias in Multimodal Large Language Model Spatial Reasoning

Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) remain unreliable on spatial multiple-choice questions, and their failures are often attributed to poorly attended visual information. We identify a complementary failure mode, spatial lexical bias: a spatial relation word added to the answer options can act as a lexical-semantic distractor that draws the model's decision toward that option. Using nine open-weight MLLMs, we show that this phenomenon is widespread. We then isolate diagnostic cases in which a model answers a binary spatial question correctly yet consistently chooses a newly added third spatial option, which we call binary-stable but ternary-fragile cases. Leveraging mechanistic interpretability tools on these cases, we find that the failure arises on the language side rather than the visual side: visual attention analyses and residual-stream probes show the correct spatial relation remains internally available, while irrelevant-option controls, activation patching, and sparse component interventions trace the bias to specific LLM-side channels and neurons. Accordingly, we show that a lightweight LLM-only DPO update on tiny single-object-pair synthetic data mitigates the bias, lifting four-way robust accuracy by up to 100 points on synthetic data, and by 68.0, 32.6, and 20.1 points on broader evaluation datasets WhatsUp, SpatialMQA-Direct, and VSR.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

Medical Causal Hypothesis Verification with Large Language Models

The growing use of large language models (LLMs) for search and information retrieval underscores the need to evaluate their reliability in high-stakes domains such as healthcare. Although LLMs can effectively answer questions about diseases, symptoms, and treatments, their ability to accurately assess causal relationships and ground their conclusions in verified scientific evidence remains unclear. Here, we present a preliminary, small-scale study that investigates the accuracy of LLMs in evaluating causal medical claims and supporting them with peer-reviewed research. We propose an evaluation framework for causal hypothesis verification that can be used to systematically track the performance of existing and future LLMs. We assess the performance of eight LLMs on 17 medical causal hypotheses to evaluate whether they can reliably verify these hypotheses using scientific evidence from the literature. We systematically annotate the scientific evidence they provide according to six criteria (a total of 1,067 annotation points) and assess them with nine evaluation metrics. Our analysis shows that while LLMs exhibit strong recall, they often perform poorly at providing valid scientific articles and evidence for support and at rejecting unsupported hypotheses. These findings highlight a critical limitation of current LLMs, as they cannot yet be trusted fully to verify causal relationships from the biomedical literature. This work underscores the need for rigorous evaluation before using LLMs for search and retrieval in healthcare settings.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

Cross-lingual Functional Vectors for Emotion Detection in Large Language Models

Function vectors (FVs) have recently emerged as a promising mechanism for steering the behavior of large language models (LLMs) by injecting task-specific latent direction representations derived from in-context demonstrations. While prior studies have shown that FVs can recover task behavior in structured in-context learning settings, their effectiveness on semantically complex tasks and their ability to generalize across languages remain underexplored. We investigate the cross-lingual transferability of FVs using multilingual multi-label emotion recognition as a challenging semantic classification benchmark. Specifically, we examine whether FVs extracted from a source language can steer task behavior in another language under both standard clean and perturbed zero-shot settings without providing demonstrations during inference. Across diverse cross-lingual settings, applying FVs substantially improves performance, suggesting that FVs capture language-agnostic, task-relevant signals rather than purely language-specific lexical patterns, and highlighting their potential as a lightweight and transferable mechanism for multilingual task adaptation. We observe that each LLM exhibits a relatively stable optimal range of attention heads for constructing effective FVs, and the pattern remains consistent across languages. In addition, FVs can partially replicate the task-steering effects of standard few-shot in-context learning while avoiding the computational overhead of processing multiple demonstrations, making them effective for large-scale practical applications. Our code is available at https://github.com/yingjie7/cross_lingual_fvs.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

Some Emotions Run Deeper: Layer-wise Probing and Causal Intervention in Large Language Models

Emotion is expressed in text along a wide spectrum, from surface lexical cues to inferences entangled with content. Most layer-wise analyses of emotion in LLMs use a single corpus, leaving open whether the depth at which emotion becomes accessible is a property of the model or also of the text source. We investigate this across three datasets spanning different degrees of explicitness and contextualization in emotion expression (Twitter posts, Reddit comments, and autobiographical narratives) and eight 1B--9B open-weight LLMs from the Llama, Qwen, and Granite families. We combine layer-wise probing with offline feature scaling and online forward interventions, transfer analyses, and an early-exit classifier. We find that (i) the best probing layer shifts systematically across corpora, from input-adjacent layers to over half model depth, and this ordering persists after matching label-by-length-bin distributions; (ii) across the evaluated settings, forward-pass interventions on probe-selected bands reduce test accuracy by 5--6 points more than same-width random bands ($q < 0.01$); (iii) selected bands transfer across datasets and emotion categories, suggesting partially shared affective information rather than strictly per-emotion substrates; and (iv) probe-selected early-exit representations outperform full-depth exits by $6.9$ percentage points on average.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

What and Whose Knowledge? Measuring Epistemic Diversity in Large Language Models

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as primary knowledge sources, yet their epistemic diversity - defined as the diversity of real-world claims in their outputs - has never been measured. Low epistemic diversity would pose a risk of knowledge collapse as homogeneous LLMs mediate a shrinking in the range of accessible information over time. The dominant paradigm is that overall LLM diversity is low, but this is always with respect to a single point in time, with no reference baseline or consideration for variation across countries. We address this gap in knowledge by performing the first systematic study of epistemic diversity in LLMs across time and cultural context, testing 27 LLMs on 155 topics covering 12 countries, resulting in 1.7M responses and 70M individual claims. We find that epistemic diversity has increased substantially over the past three years, a positive counter to recent diversity pessimism. However, despite progress, we find that every system is less diverse than a search baseline. This gap is not uniform: RAG can improve diversity, while large models are counterintuitively less diverse than smaller ones. Moreover, LLM parametric knowledge systematically reflects English over local-language knowledge for country specific topics. Together, these results demonstrate that while progress on epistemic diversity is tangible, it is insufficient and unevenly distributed.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

SinkPruner: Sink-Free Visual Token Pruning for Multimodal Large Language Models

Despite their strong multimodal understanding ability, multimodal large language models (MLLMs) incur substantial computational overhead when processing long visual token sequences. To reduce inference costs, recent studies have explored visual token pruning through vision-centric or text-guided strategies. However, these methods often overlook high-norm outlier tokens, i.e., tokens with abnormally large feature norms, leading to suboptimal pruning decisions. In this work, we show that such high-norm outlier tokens are highly redundant in both feature and spatial dimensions, yet are often mistakenly preserved as informative cues by existing methods. Motivated by this observation, we propose SinkPruner, a training-free visual token pruning framework for efficient MLLM inference. SinkPruner follows a coarse-to-fine design with two key modules: a visual sanitizer that filters high-norm redundancies and alleviates attention sink and attention dispersion, and a text-guided pruner that further retains tokens semantically aligned with the text query. Extensive experiments on twelve image-language and four video-language benchmarks demonstrate the effectiveness, efficiency, and generalizability of our framework. Notably, SinkPruner preserves 96.5% (91.8%) of the original performance of LLaVA-1.5 (Qwen2.5-VL) under an 89% token reduction. Experiments further indicate that our visual sanitizer exhibits promising transferability in enhancing the performance of existing pruning methods. Our code is available at https://github.com/LaVi-Lab/SinkPruner.

cs.CV↗
arXiv2026

Standardizing Longitudinal Radiology Report Evaluation via Large Language Model Annotation

Longitudinal information in radiology reports refers to the sequential tracking of findings across multiple examinations over time, which is crucial for monitoring disease progression and guiding clinical decisions. Many recent automated radiology report generation methods are designed to capture longitudinal information; however, validating their performance is challenging. There is no proper tool to consistently label temporal changes in both ground-truth and model-generated texts for meaningful comparisons. Large language models (LLMs) offer a promising annotation alternative, as they are capable of capturing nuanced linguistic patterns and semantic similarities without extensive manual intervention. They also adapt well to new contexts. In this study, we therefore propose an LLM-based pipeline to automatically annotate longitudinal information in radiology reports. The pipeline first identifies sentences containing relevant information and then extracts the progression of diseases. We evaluate and compare five mainstream LLMs on these two tasks using 500 manually annotated reports. Considering both efficiency and performance, Qwen2.5-32B was subsequently selected and used to annotate another 95,169 reports from the public MIMIC-CXR dataset. Our Qwen2.5-32B-annotated dataset provided us with a standardized benchmark for evaluating report generation models. Using this new benchmark, we assessed seven state-of-the-art report generation models. Our LLM-based annotation method outperforms existing annotation solutions, achieving 11.3\% and 5.3\% higher F1-scores for longitudinal information detection and disease tracking, respectively. The source code is available at https://github.com/wxinyi1996/Standardizing-Longitudinal-Chest-X-ray-Report-Evaluation-via-Large-Language-Model-Annotation.git.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

Benchmarking large language model agent societies against human behavioural distributions

Populations of large language model agents are increasingly used as experimental societies. Three doubts shadow every such result: whether the agents behave like the humans they stand in for, whether a finding survives changes to the apparatus that leave the rules untouched, and whether apparent social dynamics are interaction at all rather than the reproduction of experiments the models have read. This article introduces SILICA, an open instrument that tests all three. Five environments carry published human anchors, each paired with perturbations that re-render the same rules and with variants whose payoffs point away from the memorised result. Twelve open-weight models were run through it on a single consumer graphics card. Agreement with human data is confined to starting points: first-round public-goods contributions fall inside the equivalence margin for eight of eleven models, while no model matches end-state contributions or the human corridor of cooperation. Merely swapping the order in which two actions are listed costs one model 58 points of cooperation. Presenting responders with a fixed schedule of offers shows that only one model, the sole reasoning-trained one, places its acceptance threshold where the incentive requires; two move theirs part of the way, two move them the wrong way, and three never acquire one. Conventions form through a shared prior over the names rather than through negotiation, though negotiation reappears once that prior is disrupted. On the certification ladder defined here, current silicon societies support exploratory claims and no more.

physics.soc-ph↗
arXiv2026

Do Large Language Models Capture the Diversity in their Training Data?

Large language models are trained to model conditional distributions over text, yet it remains inadequately understood whether they capture the full diversity of plausible outputs present in their training data. We study this question through an information-theoretic lens by comparing the conditional entropy of model-generated outputs with that of the corresponding training data. Given paired input-output samples, we use conditional entropy and its matrix-based analogue based on von Neumann entropy to measure output variability beyond what is explained by the conditioning input, without requiring multiple reference outputs for the same prompt. Across LLM families with publicly available training data, including OLMo, Pythia, and GPT-Neo, we consistently find that model-generated outputs exhibit lower conditional entropy than their training data, across different model scales, sequence lengths, and decoding strategies. We observe a similar conditional diversity gap beyond language modeling, including class-conditioned ImageNet generators and text-conditioned models trained on MS-COCO. To address this gap, we propose a post-hoc correction mechanism that generates multiple outputs for each input and reweights them through a matrix-entropy projection, increasing conditional diversity while remaining close to the original model distribution. We prove the concavity of the matrix-based conditional entropy functional, which makes the resulting entropy-constrained projection a convex optimization problem, and develop a scalable mirror-descent algorithm for its implementation. Our results reveal a systematic conditional diversity gap between modern generative models and their training data, and provide an information-theoretic framework for measuring and mitigating this gap.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

Automatic Item Generation for Personality Situational Judgment Tests with Large Language Models

Personality assessment through situational judgment tests (SJTs) offers unique advantages over traditional Likert-type self-report scales, yet their development remains labor-intensive, time-consuming, and heavily dependent on subject matter experts. Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have shown promise for automatic item generation (AIG). Building on these developments, the present study focuses on developing and evaluating a structured and generalizable framework for automatically generating personality SJTs, using GPT-4 and ChatGPT-5 as empirical examples. Three studies were conducted. Study 1 systematically compared the effects of prompt design and temperature settings on the content validity of LLM-generated items to develop an effective and stable LLM-based AIG approach for personality SJT. Results showed that optimized prompts and a temperature of 1.0 achieved the best balance of creativity and accuracy on GPT-4. Study 2 examined the cross-model generalizability and reproducibility of this automated SJT generation approach through multiple rounds. The results showed that the approach consistently produced reproducible and high-quality items on ChatGPT-5. Study 3 evaluated the psychometric properties of LLM-generated SJTs covering five facets of the Big Five personality traits. Results demonstrated satisfactory reliability and validity across most facets, though limitations were observed in the convergent validity of the compliance facet and certain aspects of criterion-related validity. These findings provide robust evidence that the proposed LLM-based AIG approach can produce culturally appropriate and psychometrically sound SJTs with efficiency comparable to or exceeding traditional methods.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

Error-Driven Scene Editing for 3D Grounding in Large Language Models

Despite recent progress in 3D-LLMs, they remain limited in accurately grounding language to visual and spatial elements in 3D environments. This limitation stems in part from training data that focuses on language reasoning rather than spatial understanding due to scarce 3D resources, leaving inherent grounding biases unresolved. To address this, we propose 3D scene editing as a key mechanism to generate visual counterfactuals that mitigate these biases through fine-grained spatial manipulation, without requiring costly scene reconstruction or large-scale 3D data collection. Furthermore, to make these edits targeted and directly address the specific weaknesses of the model, we introduce DEER-3D, an error-driven framework that diagnoses grounding failures and generates targeted counterfactual training supervision via a structured "Decompose, Diagnose, Edit, and Retrain" loop. Specifically, given a grounding failure, DEER-3D first identifies the predicate-level error (e.g., attribute or spatial relation). It then performs minimal predicate-aligned scene edits, such as recoloring or repositioning, and constructs aligned question-answer pairs that explicitly target the failed predicate, forming targeted counterfactual training examples. We evaluate our editing pipeline across multiple benchmarks for 3D grounding and scene understanding tasks, consistently demonstrating improvements across all grounding datasets through iterative refinement (4-6% gains). DEER-3D underscores the effectiveness of targeted, error-driven scene editing in bridging linguistic reasoning with spatial grounding in 3D LLMs.

cs.CV↗
arXiv2026

SMRC: Aligning Large Language Models with Student Reasoning for Mathematical Error Correction

Large language models (LLMs) often make reasoning errors when solving mathematical problems, and how to automatically detect and correct these errors has become an important research direction. However, existing approaches \textit{mainly focus on self-correction within the model}, which falls short of the "teacher-style" correction required in educational settings, \textit{i.e.}, systematically guiding and revising a student' s problem-solving process. To address this gap, we propose \texttt{SMRC} (\textit{\underline{S}tudent \underline{M}athematical \underline{R}easoning \underline{C}orrection}), a novel method that aligns LLMs with student reasoning. Specifically, \texttt{SMRC} formulates student reasoning as a multi-step sequential decision problem and introduces Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) to explore optimal correction paths. To reduce the cost of the annotating process-level rewards, we leverage breadth-first search (BFS) guided by LLMs and final-answer evaluation to generate reward signals, which are then distributed across intermediate reasoning steps via a back-propagation mechanism, enabling fine-grained process supervision. Additionally, we construct a benchmark for high school mathematics, MSEB (Multi-Solution Error Benchmark), consisting of 158 instances that include problem statements, student solutions, and correct reasoning steps. We further propose a dual evaluation protocol centered on \textbf{solution accuracy} and \textbf{correct-step retention}, offering a comprehensive measure of educational applicability. Experiments demonstrate that \texttt{SMRC} significantly outperforms existing methods on two public datasets (ProcessBench and MR-GSM8K) and our MSEB in terms of effectiveness and overall performance. The code are available at https://github.com/ECNU-RAIL/SMRC-EMNLP2026.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

Beyond Fluency: A Rubric-Based Benchmark for Evaluating Saudi Dialect and Cultural Competence in Large Language Models

Large language models are increasingly deployed in Arabic-speaking markets, yet standard benchmarks overwhelmingly reward Modern Standard Arabic (MSA) fluency while leaving dialectal and culturally grounded competence unmeasured. This gap is consequential: everyday Arabic is largely dialectal, and dialect encodes social meaning that MSA-centric evaluation cannot capture. We present a rubric-based benchmark for the Saudi dialect, comprising 31 expert-authored prompts spanning idiomatic, pragmatic, lexical, and culturally-embedded phenomena, each paired with an expert-established ground truth. Our methodology separates evaluation into a model-agnostic phase, in which atomic, MECE positive criteria are derived solely from the ground truth, and a model-specific phase, in which four state-of-the-art systems -- Claude Opus 5, Gemini 3.7, GPT-5.6, and Kimi K3 -- are scored against those criteria and penalised for errors they actively introduce. Across 124 model-prompt evaluations we catalogue 466 error instances under a nine-category taxonomy. The four systems cluster within a narrow macro-average band (42.7%-53.1%), with no model exceeding 55% and every model recording at least one negative-scoring prompt, confirming that Saudi dialectal competence remains broadly unsolved. Notably, Ambiguous Framing is the dominant failure mode (37.3% of errors) while outright Hallucination accounts for only 11.2%, indicating that models fail less by stating falsehoods than by distorting register and flattening pragmatic nuance. We further observe a consistency-versus-ceiling trade-off and model-distinctive error signatures. We release the full prompt set, ground truths, and scored rubrics to support reproducible dialectal evaluation.

cs.CL↗