arXiv preprint ·
Does AI-Generated Scientific Text Follow Human Argumentation Patterns? A CARS-Based Comparison of Research Article Introductions
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
Large language models are moving from helping write up research to helping do it, which makes it important to know how the scientific text they produce differs from human writing. Work on this question has stayed mostly at the surface, using lexical and stylistic cues that light paraphrasing erases. We look instead at rhetorical structure, the sequence of argumentative moves through which a text makes its case. We study research-article introductions under Swales' CARS model, and compare original introductions from published linguistics articles with generated counterparts of the same papers. We find that human-written introductions are more flexible in which moves they use and in what order, while the generated ones are more uniform. Giving the models the CARS definitions makes them more rigid.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Computation & Language / NLP
AuraForge: Scaling Security Supervision for Training Coding Agents
Learning When to Commit from Partial Speech for End-to-End Simultaneous Speech Translation
Child-Adapted Structured Phonological Representations for Interpretable Speech Sound Analysis
VERSE: Verified Self-Evolving Optimizer for Agent Harnesses
Kinematic MeanFlow: One-Step Action Generation Policy for Robotic Foundation Models
Get the few papers worth your time in Computation & Language / NLP every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.