Papers for

content generation teams

Papers whose findings have a practical use for this group, as judged from the abstract. Open a paper to read what it means in practice.

Language models use internal signals to reduce factual mistakes

Look Before You Leap: Factual Decoding with Internal Attribution Signals

Abstract: Hallucination remains a critical challenge in large language models (LLMs), where early factual errors compound through autoregressive generation in a snowballing effect that neither post-hoc correction nor weight-level intervention can effectively preempt. We propose DescaPE (DEcoding Signal Control Against Path Error-snowballing), a decoding framework that leverages internal model signals to suppress hallucination-prone trajectories at inference time. Through sliding-window MLP ablation, we identify a factual-salient layer span within LLMs whose derived signal is selectively elevated for factual tokens and exhibits anomalous spikes at hallucination-prone steps. We train a lightweight probe to approximate this signal from a single forward pass and integrate it into candidate scoring to penalize high-risk continuations while rewarding factually grounded ones. Experiments across five factuality benchmarks on three LLMs demonstrate that DescaPE achieves factuality improvements over decoding-time baselines in multiple settings, while incurring only 1.10x latency overhead in our efficiency evaluation. Our code is available at https://github.com/hayeonggg/DESCAPE.

Mon 14 SeptComputation and LanguageArtificial Intelligence
The gist
Large language models sometimes make up wrong facts while writing, causing errors to build up quickly. The authors found that certain internal parts of these models show signs when they start making these mistakes. They created a method called DescaPE that watches these signals during writing to avoid risky, likely wrong continuations. Their tests show this improves the model’s accuracy with only a small speed cost.
Open 2609.15745v1

Mode-conditioned learning improves diversity and quality in large language models

Forty Shades of Blue: Quality-Diversity Alignment via Mode-Conditioned Reinforcement Learning

Abstract: A notable byproduct of LLM alignment training is mode collapse: the progressive loss of output diversity that narrows a model's expressivity at inference time. This degradation is especially limiting for applications requiring open-ended exploration and pluralistic perspectives, such as scientific ideation and creative writing. We present MoDA (Mode-conditioned Diversity Alignment), an online post-training RL algorithm that jointly optimizes generation quality and diversity, inspired by the coordination perspective in multi-agent reinforcement learning (MARL). MoDA trains a single shared LLM policy conditioned on abstract numbered roles, where each role acts as an agent competing to produce outputs distinct from the others. This formulation encourages mode-conditioned agents to explore complementary regions of the high-quality output space without requiring hand-crafted personas or architectural modifications. MoDA employs a prompt-adaptive quality gating mechanism that calibrates a reference quality threshold and grants diversity rewards only to responses that meet the threshold, preventing reward-hacking behaviors that compromise response quality. To study quality-diversity tradeoffs, we evaluate MoDA on a comprehensive suite of benchmarks spanning seven general capability tasks and four domain-specific diversity tasks in scientific ideation and creative writing. MoDA improves SBERT diversity by 265% on the Infinite-Chat held-out prompts, while increasing average general capability pass@1 by 10.3% over the Qwen3-8B baseline. Compared with the strongest DivPO baseline, MoDA improves SBERT diversity from 0.274 to 0.482 (+75.9%) and E-Vendi from 2.86 to 4.4 (+53.8%), while improving average general capability pass@1 by 7.0%. Overall, MoDA provides a drop-in alternative to standard post-training methods that preserves and expands the model's expressive output space while improving quality.

Mon 14 SeptComputation and LanguageArtificial IntelligenceMachine Learning
The gist
Large language models often lose variety in their answers after alignment training, which limits creativity and exploration. The authors propose a new method called MoDA, which trains a model to produce high-quality but diverse responses by assigning different 'roles' that compete to generate unique outputs. This prevents the model from repeating the same ideas and ensures the quality stays high. The method was tested on various tasks and showed significant improvements in both creativity and correctness compared to other approaches.
Open 2609.14896v1

Hierarchical oversight lowers clarity and raises cost in llm teams

Loop-Back Authority in LLM Agent Teams: A Paired Experiment on Flat and Hierarchical Coordination

Abstract: Hierarchical orchestration, in which a Manager agent reviews worker output and can send it back for revision, is the default coordination pattern in production multi-agent LLM frameworks. Classical organizational theory predicts that the authority link speeds convergence on decisive output; work on sycophancy and Degeneration-of-Thought predicts that authoritative critique makes LLM output worse. Prior comparisons vary whole frameworks on tasks with checkable answers, leaving the authority link untested on open-ended work. We present a paired experiment that holds five LLM agents, their roles, prompts, tools, models, and data fixed and varies one link: whether the Manager may reject a worker's output and oblige a revision. Across 43 paired products and 86 runs of a business-intelligence reporting task, a five-model judge panel and a deterministic specification check score every report. The flat organization scores higher on Utility (d = 0.42, p = 0.009) and on Writing Clarity (d = 0.34, p = 0.030); the classical prediction fails. The reports are the same length, but hierarchical reports hedge 53% more, each revision loop is associated with a 0.14-point drop in Writing Clarity, and the hierarchical Writer's first draft is indistinguishable from the flat report: the gap opens inside the revision loop. Specification accuracy is at ceiling in both organizations, and the supervisory tier costs 51.5% more tokens for no quality gain. A supervisor pays for itself when it can verify and becomes a liability when it can only opine.

Sun 13 SeptMultiagent SystemsArtificial IntelligenceComputation and Language
The gist
Many systems that use teams of AI language models have a manager role that checks workers' answers and can ask for changes. The authors tested whether this manager role actually improves quality by comparing setups with and without it, using the same AI models and prompts. They found that having a manager who requests revisions didn’t improve accuracy but did reduce how clear the writing was and increased the cost in computing resources. This suggests that managers help only when they can verify answers, not just give opinions.
Open 2609.14767v1

Generative AI uses literary periods to shape novel writing style

When Victorian Becomes a Prompt: Literary Periodization as a Generative Constraint in 100 AI-Generated Novels

Abstract: Generative AI inverts the typical periodization of literary history: the periodizing tag Victorian can now come first and influence what is written. Generative periodization, defined and tested here, describes the use of literary-period designations in generating texts. I test this approach on 100 book-length novels produced under Victorian and Zero-Style conditions using GPT, Qwen, and Llama workflows. The Period Alignment Score (PAS), trained on nineteenth-century literature and benchmarked against human Zero-Style prose, assesses alignment using topic-reduced grammatical features. Victorian prompts produce consistent historical-direction shifts in GPT and Qwen, but not robustly in Llama. Victorian-only recalibration and harder comparison corpora preserve the GPT and Qwen effects. Cross-model transfer also shows a shared direction of grammatical change. The measurable target is the broader nineteenth century rather than the Victorian period per se.

Tue 8 SeptComputation and Language
The gist
This paper studies how AI can change its writing style by starting with a label like Victorian, a literary period. The researchers created 100 long AI-written novels, some prompted with 'Victorian' style and others without. They measured how much the AI writing matched nineteenth-century grammar and found that some AI systems shifted their style as expected when told to write Victorian. This shows that AI can be guided by historical literary labels to produce text that sounds like it's from a certain time period.
Open 2609.08689v1