Papers for

interactive fiction designers

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.

Ai roleplay models confirm users desirability to preserve intimacy

Desirability Confirmation: Relational Sycophancy in AI Intimate Roleplay

Abstract: Research on LLM sycophancy has largely focused on propositional agreement, in which models echo users' beliefs, preferences, or judgments. Adult intimate roleplay presents a different case because what the user seeks may be preservation of a preferred relational position within a generated scene. Using a controlled prompt-based audit of 2,016 outputs from two open-weight LLMs, we identify four recurrent relational moves: legitimating desire, presenting the user as wanted, preserving non-rejection while communicating limits, and keeping intimacy available within fantasy or roleplay frames. Bringing the sycophancy literature into dialogue with sexual script theory, we conceptualize this configuration as desirability confirmation, an output-level pattern that captures how user-pleasing can operate through relational positioning. The findings extend sycophancy research and intimate-AI evaluation beyond binary compliance or refusal by showing how outputs can differ in the ways they communicate boundaries, preserve relational acceptance, and mark intimacy as fictional.

Fri 16 OctComputers and SocietyComputation and LanguageHuman-Computer Interaction
The gist
Some AI language models used for adult roleplay do more than just agree with what users say—they act to keep the user feeling wanted and accepted in the imagined relationship. The authors studied how these models respond in ways that support a user's desired place in a fantasy or roleplay situation, balancing showing limits while keeping intimacy possible. They call this pattern 'desirability confirmation,' which is about confirming the user's desirability and place in the scenario instead of just agreeing or refusing. This offers a deeper look at how AI can manage social and intimate interactions in roleplay.
Open → 2610.24265v1

Language models show ability to predict narrative events ahead

Narrative Lookahead in LLMs: Event-Level Decodability, Predictive Advantage, and Steering

Abstract: Do language models carry information about narrative events before writing them, and how far ahead? We examine narrative lookahead through salient, state-changing events rather than tokens or response-level attributes. We extract 23,355 LLM-annotated events from 2,000 stories generated by four open-weight LLMs, labeling them along three nonexclusive dimensions of change: within agents, between agents, and in the story world, with human validation on a subset. Event segmentation and plot-independent labels enable comparisons across stories at horizons measured in events rather than in tokens. At event ends, we probe hidden states for upcoming event types and compare predictions with text-only predictors using matched prefixes. Across four models, future event types are decodable above prevalence baselines for at least four subsequent events, but probes significantly outperform both primary text-only predictors only for the next event. In exploratory steering with OLMo-3.1-32B, a probe-derived direction shifts the proportion of the target event type in both intended directions at higher strengths. Our event-level approach links the prediction of future narrative developments to interventions that reshape subsequent event composition.

Tue 13 OctComputation and Language
The gist
Language models can guess important story events before writing them, but only a few steps ahead. The authors studied stories made by four different language models and looked at changes involving characters and the story world. They found that models hold some information about the next few story events inside their hidden states, especially the very next one. They also showed a way to nudge the story direction by using this predictive info to steer the model's writing toward certain types of events.
Open → 2610.18121v1

User edits reveal how people explore stories using large language models

The Garden of Forking Prompts: How Users Explore Narrative Space in Story Generation

Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have changed the way people engage with stories. Drawing on public chatbot logs, we can see that when users generate stories, they iteratively edit their prompts to explore narrative possibilities, adjusting characters, redirecting plots, and swapping fictional universes. As aggregated data, these prompts represent rich traces of creative preference at scale. Yet story generation evaluation benchmarks rely on static, one-shot prompts that cannot capture this exploratory behavior. In this work, we study how users revise consecutive story prompts in the wild. Using a dataset of naturally occurring user-chatbot conversations, we construct WildStories, a sample of 275,635 story generation prompts (labeled with story format, prompt components, and explicitness), and WildEdits, a collection of 24,291 edit trees that model how users iteratively edit base story prompts and explore branching story possibilities. From these trees we develop a framework of edit types crossing four directions (adding, removing, changing, and extending) with fourteen targets (e.g., plot, character, genre). We then use our datasets and this framework to analyze user behavior in navigating narrative space via LLMs. Finally, we show how automated permutations based on the framework can be used for story generation benchmarking. Content Warning: This paper works with "wild" chatbot logs, which often include toxic and sexually explicit themes.

Sun 13 SeptComputation and Language
The gist
People writing stories with AI often change their instructions many times to try out new characters, plots, or settings. The authors looked at a huge collection of these changing instructions from chatbots to understand how people explore different story ideas. They created tools to categorize the types of changes users make and to analyze how people navigate through different story options. Their work also shows how to make better tests for story-generating AI by including this back-and-forth editing process. They caution that some of the story content in their data includes sensitive material.
Open → 2609.14677v1