Stylistic Fidelity

This paper presents a small-scale quantitative experiment that links syntactic structure to stylistic functions in narrative prose. Starting from a dependency-parsed corpus of 3,300 sentences, we derive sentence-level stylistic labels across five categories --- descriptive, introspective, causal, ideological, and neutral --- using a transparent rule-based procedure that inspects lemmas, universal part-of-speech tags, and syntactic relations. For each sentence we construct a compact representation of its syntactic profile as a sequence of linearised triples combining lemma, POS tag, and dependency relation. These patterns serve as input to standard machine-learning classifiers trained to predict sentence-level style. The best-performing model achieves a macro-F1 of 0.948 under 10-fold cross-validation. The experiment is implemented entirely in Python using open-source tools. Our goal is not to propose a fully fledged stylistic theory, but to offer a reproducible and extensible workflow for exploring how grammatical structure contributes to narrative interpretation.

LLMs have been rapidly adopted across writing tasks, prompting the development of tools for detecting LLM-generated text. Yet, these tools largely measure how much of a document's surface text was written by an LLM and aren't fundamentally designed to measure how much of the information content or ideas originated from the LLM itself rather than being supplied by the user in the prompt. In this work, we design a framework that measures how much value a person adds on top of what a language model could have easily produced by itself. The method requires no training or labeled data and never scores the document's surface text, insulating it from stylistic confounders. Instead, it extracts the document's content at increasing levels of granularity, uses an LLM to reconstruct the document from each partial representation, and compares these reconstructions with those produced from the task description alone. We call this framework Value Over Language Model (VOLM), which measures a document's contribution relative to a replacement-level document that an LLM could produce from the task description alone. We evaluate VOLM with a specific instantiation of this framework across three domains: news articles, ICLR peer reviews, and argumentative essays. VOLM separates human-authored documents from matched LLM-generated documents produced from generic task descriptions, while remaining substantially invariant to content-preserving transformations, including LLM-based reconstruction and round-trip translation. We further find that increasingly constrained content extractors reduce residual differences between LLM-generated and humanized text, demonstrating the importance of disentangling informational content from stylistic variation. We hope these results encourage further work on specialized instantiations of the framework and on assessing human contributions in LLM-assisted writing more generally.

Reward models trained on human preferences are known to suffer from length, formatting, and other stylistic biases. In this paper we use patterning, which reweights each preference pair according to its measured effect on posterior expectation values of benchmark losses (its susceptibility), to debias a Gemma 2 9B Instruct reward model trained on Skywork-Reward-Preference v0.2. We obtain $+14.2 \pm 1.2$ pp on RM-Bench Hard, the split where style cues point against correctness (mean $\pm$ s.e.\ over 5 seeds), with overall RM-Bench accuracy preserved, comparable to the strongest Hard-split gain reported by the closest published comparator (SteerRM, $+13.2$ pp). We demonstrate in a simple case that the reweighting is interpretable by tracing a side effect of the intervention (a regression on a safety subset of RM-Bench) to a small class of training pairs, which we confirm by ablation. The weights also transfer: those computed on Gemma 2 9B debias Gemma 2 2B and 27B with no recomputation, and transfer partially to Llama 3.1 8B. This is the first application of patterning, a program grounded in singular learning theory, beyond small models and synthetic tasks.

Attributing an artwork to an artist has traditionally relied on detailed visual observations and descriptions, known as stylistic analysis in art history. By contrast, current artificial intelligence (AI) models used in the field offer only unexplained probabilistic classifications. To bridge this methodological gap, we present an AI framework that automates stylistic analysis of paintings, providing a foundation for enhancing evidence collection, discovery, and verification. By training a vision transformer (ViT) on a large corpus of paintings with metadata, our system encodes this art history-specific data as embeddings. These representations are factorized via sparse dictionary learning into a shared set of features that recur across the training set. A large language model (LLM) then interprets each feature by retrieving associated artworks and their accompanying curator-written texts, and synthesizes them into descriptions that reflect their stylistic attributes. Finally, an autonomous coordinator LLM applies a reasoning-and-action (ReAct) framework to weight, test, and refine these features into cohesive descriptions of an artwork, or comparisons of artworks. This approach converts detailed visual features into descriptive terms, addressing a key challenge in art history. It thus connects the use of images as data with the semantic concerns of humanists, establishing vision-based computational art history as an area for future growth.

However, whether these judges truly evaluate the scientific substance of ideas or are influenced by superficial stylistic presentation remains an open question. To address this question, we propose SciStyleBench, a unified three-component benchmark for diagnosing and mitigating stylistic bias in LLM-based idea evaluation: (i) First, SciStyleStage, a three-stage evaluation environment that applies controlled stylistic perturbations to fixed scientific content across three settings no context, fixed-domain context, and open-domain retrieval context, covering 600 scientific ideas and 15 style variants, with 9,000 evaluation instances per setting; (ii) Second, SciStyleMetrics, a set of quantitative measures, including Style Bias Index (SBI), Substance Recognition Rate (SRR), and Adversarial Win Rate (AWR), to characterize how stylistic variation affects scoring stability, substance discrimination, and ranking robustness; (iii) Third, SciStyleExtractor, a plug-and-play evaluation module that separates presentation style from scientific content by predicting style type and deviation before style-conditioned evaluation, enabling us to assess whether style awareness reduces stylistic bias. Experiments on SciStyleBench show that direct LLM judges remain sensitive to writing style and struggle to distinguish scientific substance. In contrast, SciStyleExtractor reduces SBI from 0.566 to 0.501 while increasing SRR and AWR from 0.504 and 0.554 to 0.759 and 0.899, respectively. These results suggest that robust idea evaluation requires invariance to stylistic variation without sacrificing sensitivity to scientific substance. Overall, SciStyleBench provides a systematic framework for identifying, quantifying, and mitigating stylistic bias in scientific idea evaluation.

What did it take for Hermes, the devout messenger of the Olympian gods, to slay Argus Panoptes, the multi-eyed giant of Greek myth? As the perfect guardian, Panoptes' legion of ever-watchful eyes proved difficult -- but not impossible -- to defeat. The centerpiece of Hermes' strategy was obfuscation and sabotage. Posing as a shepherd, Hermes sealed each of Panoptes' eyes -- eyes that would otherwise have alerted the fearsome giant to Hermes' plot -- and vanquished him. The moral of the story: when a challenger must surmount a formidable foe -- one far greater in stature and vastly more equipped -- crafty maneuvers are not merely advisable but indispensable for victory. In this work, the "challenger" is a collective leveraging adversarial tactics to overcome the "multi-eyed giant" of stylometric systems and surveillance apparatuses. To successfully claw back the privacy siphoned by the multi-eyed giant, the challenger must carefully evaluate their plan of attack, $\textit{TraceTarnish}$, and determine what does and does not work to anonymize the authorship of text. To that end, we conduct an ablation study of $\textit{TraceTarnish}$ to better understand which module -- Translation, Obfuscation, Imitation, or Injection -- best confounds a stylometric system. Our results indicate that the most effective approach was Injection, meaning that inserting zero-width Unicode characters, homoglyphs, and intentional misspellings neutralizes the indefatigable eyes long enough to claim the head of the all-seeing giant.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable ability in generating personalized content by leveraging user histories and contextual cues. However, most existing personalization approaches rely on implicit representations within model parameters, making it difficult to interpret user-specific preferences or effectively handle long-context dependencies. To address these challenges, we propose PrefReward, a novel preference-aware generative framework that explicitly models user styles through a structured preference matrix and integrates it into the decoding process as a reward signal. PrefReward consists of two stages: (1) extracting a user-specific preference matrix that summarizes individual stylistic tendencies, and (2) using the matrix to guide generation via a KL-divergence-based reward function. Experiments on the LongLaMP dataset show that PrefReward outperforms non-personalized and retrieval-based baselines in both generation quality and personalization interpretability.

The aim of this paper is twofold. First, it investigates whether newer generative models are getting better at pastiching contemporary artworks. Second, it explores the consistency of the multidimensional nature of stylistic evaluation across different LLMs. Building on previous work, we analyze stylistic similarity between AI generated pastiches and the original artworks of twelve contemporary artists. We used five complementary computer vision models to capture texture, color, semantics, composition, and perceptual features through cosine distance in high-dimensional embedding spaces. The distances obtained show that the newer image generation model that we used has produced pastiches with improved semantic alignment and greater diversity than the model used in previous work. However, it was slightly less performant on shallow features such as color, texture, and perceptual adherence. Our findings confirm that artistic style is inherently multidimensional, and measuring it does not depend on any spatial architecture. These quantitative findings are contextualized through feedback from human evaluators, which are the artists themselves.

Large language models (LLM) trained on web-scale corpora generate output that may infringe copyright, yet existing technical safeguards focus narrowly on verbatim memorisation. EU copyright doctrine applies a broader standards: substantial similarity, which extends to stylistic choices, narrative structure, and creative elaboration. This mismatch between what current methods detect and what the law protects leaves a significant compliance gap. We introduce PSALM, an LLM-as-a-judge framework that operationalises EU copyright doctrine through ten evaluators assessing computational overlap, stylistic dimensions (writing style, narrative voice), content dimensions (character, plot, scene, world building), and statutory exceptions (parody, pastiche, quotation, scènes à faire). Applying PSALM to Llama~3.2 models fine-tuned on translated historical Dutch literary works, we find that: 1) instruction-tuned models exhibit non-trivial baseline stylistic similarity prior to corpus exposure; 2) fine-tuning induces systematic stylistic appropriation across all infringement-relevant dimensions, extending beyond verbatim memorisation to abstract narrative patterns; 3) Negative Preference Optimisation unlearning substantially reduces similarity but leaves detectable residual stylistic patterns. These findings indicate that safeguards targeting literal copying alone are insufficient to mitigate broader copyright risks. PSALM provides infrastructure for auditable, legally informed compliance evaluation, though the relationship between automated similarity scores and infringement determinations requires validation by legal experts. This work bridges qualitative legal standards and quantitative technical measurement, exposing fundamental tensions between generative AI and EU intellectual property law.

While 3D Gaussian Splatting (3DGS) provides an efficient and explicit representation for novel view synthesis, enforcing stylistic coherence across viewpoints remains challenging. Existing 3D stylization methods typically apply 2D feature-matching losses independently per rendered view, which leads to unstable style allocation, many-to-one feature reuse, and limited cross-view consistency. We propose a capacity-controlled framework for multi-view stylization of 3DGS, grounded in optimal transport. Specifically, we reformulate local style matching as a semi-balanced optimal transport problem. By introducing explicit column-capacity constraints with tunable strength, our formulation mitigates many-to-one matching and enables controllable allocation of style features. This transport-based objective provides a principled mechanism for balancing feature coverage and stylistic diversity while maintaining stable correspondences across viewpoints. To further enhance cross-view coherence, we incorporate a novel cross-view matching guidance to constrain correspondences between scene content and style patterns. In addition, we introduce several geometric regularizations to enhance the vanilla 3DGS, thereby enabling optimized Gaussian primitives to represent finer-grained textures during stylization. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our approach significantly improves multi-view stylistic consistency and produces stable, expressive 3D stylizations while preserving the core semantic structure of the scene.

In the rapidly evolving field of software development, code stylometry analyzing unique stylistic signatures of programmers plays a crit-ical role in authorship attribution and cybersecurity. Recent advancements in artificial intelligence, particularly Large Language Models (LLMs) like GPT-3.5 and GPT-4, have introduced new dimensions to this field, challenging traditional stylometry techniques. This study investigates the effectiveness of LLMs in altering code stylometry while preserving functionality and evaluates the impact of various prompt engineering strategies. Through comprehensive experiments, we assess how well these models can obscure stylistic signatures to avoid detection by a Random Forest classifier trained for authorship attribution. The results reveal significant differences in effectiveness between single-shot and multi-shot methods and highlight the importance of detailed, structured prompts. Additionally, functionality preservation checks demonstrate the challenges in maintaining code integrity post-modification. This research provides critical insights into the robustness of authorship attribution techniques against advanced AI capabilities, informing future cybersecurity and software engineering developments

Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) are increasingly deployed in personally and societally consequential settings, yet the visual cues that shape how these models judge people remain poorly understood. Prior work often compares different (groups of) individuals, making it difficult to separate appearance effects from identity differences. We introduce StylisticBias, a controlled benchmark for evaluating attribute-level social bias in MLLMs. We generate 500 photorealistic base faces and create about 50 single-attribute variations per face, producing about 25K images. This design keeps identity fixed and changes one visual attribute at a time. It lets us measure how specific cues shift model judgments. We evaluate six MLLMs across 25 binary social judgment scenarios. We find that age and body type dominate identity-level effects, while fashion style and other visual cues drive the largest attribute-level shifts. We further find that about 15 attributes account for nearly 80% of the total variation, showing that bias is concentrated in a small set of visual cues. Sensitivity is strongest in judgments that are semantically aligned with appearance, especially socioeconomic and style-related judgments. We release StylisticBias as a benchmark for fine-grained bias evaluation in multimodal models. Code and dataset: https://github.com/timo-cavelius/StylisticBias and https://hf.co/datasets/shaghayegh/stylistic-bias-dataset.

Style representation learning is a powerful tool for authorship analysis and modeling writing style, yet the latent nature of learned representations makes them difficult to interpret. Recent work has attempted to explain these representations by generating natural language descriptions with large language models (LLMs) conditioned on input text. However, such descriptions are often prone to the LLM's biases and hallucinations, and they lack an explicit objective and practical utility. In this work, we propose a novel framework for interpreting style representations through style-eliciting prompts: natural language instructions designed to steer LLMs to generate text that reflects specific stylistic attributes. We curate 1,010 distinct style features spanning 26 stylistic categories and construct a dataset by prompting an LLM to generate text conditioned on these features. Using this data, we train a decoder to generate a style prompt from the style representation of the generated text. We evaluate our approach on three tasks: (1) recovering original style prompts from generated text, (2) generating text in the same style using the recovered prompts, and (3) steering LLM outputs to match the style of human-written texts. Experiments demonstrate that our method consistently outperforms strong baselines that directly prompt LLMs with target text, achieving superior performance in both style description and style imitation. These results highlight that style-eliciting prompts can provide a practical and interpretable interface to stylistic information encoded in style representations.

Self-distillation improves learning efficiency by rewriting reference answers as training data that better matches the model's own distribution. However, reference answers also introduce strong stylistic biases, causing the generative model to imitate surface forms rather than learn useful reasoning patterns. We observe that the rewriting data contains a large number of high-perplexity (PPL) tokens, coming from two distinct sources: beneficial knowledge-enhancing logical corrections, and harmful stylistic drift induced by reference imitation. Treating all such tokens equally can disrupt the base model's original distribution and degrade performance, especially on difficult reasoning tasks. To address this, we propose Distribution-Aligned Self-Distillation (DASD), which uses an answer-aware reference model to generate candidate tokens and dynamically filters them according to the base model's confidence. DASD preserves tokens that encode useful logical knowledge while suppressing distributionally misaligned style noise. Experiments on math, code, and commonsense reasoning benchmarks show that DASD consistently outperforms competitive baselines, reduces high-PPL tokens, and improves robustness across tasks of varying difficulty.

Aligned language models often exhibit a recognizable AI-like style, yet its connection to post-training and internal representations remains poorly understood. In this work, we study whether post-training introduces or amplifies AI-like stylistic regularities and whether these regularities have a localized internal signature. To this end, we compare human text, base-model generations, and aligned-model generations under matched human-source prefixes. Aligned generations show lower human-corpus affinity and higher AI-detection rates than base generations, suggesting that post-training shifts generated text away from human-corpus style and toward detector-visible AI-like text. We then introduce PASTA (Post-training Alignment Signature Targeted Ablation), a training-free method that estimates a post-training alignment signature from aligned-base residual contrasts and ablates the corresponding direction during decoding. Across 11 aligned models and 6 AI detectors, PASTA lowers the detection rate for most aligned models; this effect transfers well across detectors and is not reproduced by random directions. Qualitative analysis suggests that PASTA generations remain relevant and coherent while exhibiting greater stylistic variation. Together, these results show that AI-like stylistic effects of post-training can be measured, localized, and causally tested through activation ablation.

Formality transfer is commonly framed as a symmetric bidirectional task between informal and formal registers. We argue that this framing conceals a supervision design flaw in existing benchmarks such as GYAFC: binary human rewrites encode relative stylistic shifts rather than absolute human notions of formality. Consequently, models learn to generate pseudo-formal outputs that satisfy benchmark labels while failing to produce genuinely formal language. We quantify this misalignment by re-evaluating benchmark formal labels under a human-aligned definition of formality, revealing substantial discrepancies that propagate to consistent informal-to-formal failures across model families. To address this issue, we reconceptualize formality transfer as a graded dimension rather than a binary attribute. We introduce a three-level spectrum: informal, casual, and formal, where casual serves as an explicit intermediate state that clarifies supervision signals. Based on this framework, we introduce 3LF, a dataset providing parallel supervision across all three levels. Training on 3LF substantially reduces informal-to-formal failures and improves alignment with human perception. For example, GPT-4.1-nano improves from 0.06 to 0.88 F1 in the informal-to-formal direction despite 3LF being significantly smaller than GYAFC. We further demonstrate that these gains cannot be reproduced through in-context learning alone and provide qualitative analyses of ambiguity-driven errors and meaning distortions. Overall, our findings demonstrate how supervision design shapes stylistic alignment and highlight the importance of alignment-aware benchmark construction in controllable text generation.

Large language models produce fluent fiction, yet their creative output is widely seen as flat. We ask where this quality originates in the training and whether it affects different domains of human fiction equally. We construct a matched story-continuation paradigm across StoryStar (public-platform), TMAS (prompt-guided), and The New Yorker (professional literary)-and compare continuations from four OLMo 32B checkpoints (Base, SFT, DPO, RLVR) against matched human text. Because these checkpoints share architecture, scale, tokenizer, and pretraining, the design isolates the post-training effect. We measure each continuation along three sentence-level dimensions: thematic motion, affective prevalence, and linguistic diversity. Across all three, post-training compresses dynamic variation: thematic transitions become more uniform, high-intensity emotions give way to neutrality, and stylistic diversity across stories shrinks. We term this progressive loss narrative flattening. The effect is directionally stable across story domains but gap size depends on the human baseline: professional literary fiction is compressed most, while public-platform and prompt-guided stories show smaller gaps, consistent with their human baselines sitting closer to the model's default rhythm. Post-trained endpoints converge across domains, suggesting alignment produces a continuation regime largely insensitive to the source domain's narrative texture.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in diverse cultural contexts, yet their ability to master aesthetic stylistics, i.e., the strategic use of language to evoke cultural resonance, remains underexplored. We curate C4STYLI, a benchmark of highly stylized translated movie titles and advertising slogans from Hong Kong and the Chinese Mainland, to evaluate LLMs via the lens of behavioral recognition and productive competence. Extensive evaluations show that LLMs differ from humans in stylistic recognition, and this recognition ability varies across text domains. In addition, stylistic recognition and generation performance in LLMs are not consistently aligned. To further examine whether LLMs genuinely capture stylistic information in stylistic recognition, we conduct structural ablation with logistic regression probes. We find that, in the Hong Kong setting, stylistic recognition in LLMs relies primarily on surface-level linguistic information rather than stylistic structure. This suggests limited sensitivity to Hong Kong-specific stylistic structure.

The known stylistic biases in LLM judges, such as a preference for verbosity or specific sentence structures, present an underexplored security vulnerability. In this work, we introduce BITE (BIas exploraTion and Exploitation), a black-box adversarial framework that learns semantics-preserving edits to mislead an LLM judge and artificially inflate the scores it assigns. We cast the selection of stylistic edits as a contextual bandit problem and use a LinUCB policy to adaptively choose edits that maximize the judge's score without access to model parameters or gradients. Empirically, we test BITE across a diverse range of LLM judges and tasks, including both pointwise and pairwise comparisons on chatbot leaderboards and AI-reviewer benchmarks. BITE achieves an attack success rate exceeding 65% and raises scores by 1-2 points on a 9-point scale, all while preserving semantic equivalence. We further assess the attack's stealthiness, showing that BITE evades standard style-control methods and several detection baselines. Our findings expose a fundamental weakness in the LLM-as-a-judge paradigm and motivate robust, attack-aware evaluation. Our code is available at https://github.com/xianglinyang/llm-as-a-judge-attack.

Mask-free video object insertion has emerged as a challenging task, requiring harmonious integration of reference objects into source videos. However, existing methods struggle when references exhibit severe stylistic domain gaps with the source scene. To overcome this, we propose \textit{\textbf{Smart-Insertion-V}}, an end-to-end \textbf{Dual-Stream} framework that concurrently conducts video insertion and image style transfer. Within this framework, the image stream synchronously guides the video generation process, while a \textbf{Closed-loop Feedback} mechanism is further incorporated to ensure robust insertion. Inevitably, integrating these diverse conditioning signals results in feature entanglement and style leakage. To tackle this issue, we design \textbf{Dual-World-View RoPE} to distinguish different signals via spatial-temporal offsets without incurring heavy training overhead. Furthermore, to facilitate spatial grounding and stylistic adaptation, we introduce a \textbf{Decoupled Guidance Module} that leverages a Vision-Language Model for semantic reasoning while preserving original temporal guidance with native text encoder. To bridge data gap for harmonious reference insertion task, we propose a data curation pipeline and will release an \textbf{open-source dataset}. Experiments demonstrate that our method can insert objects into plausible positions while achieving the most harmonious results.

Generative text-to-image models are typically trained on large-scale web-scraped datasets that include diverse visual content such as copyrighted and stylistically distinctive artworks, raising concerns about ownership, attribution, and the unintended reuse of protected visual expressions. A key issue is that models can learn stylistic patterns from this data and reproduce them in generated outputs without any explicit reference in the prompt. We refer to this phenomenon as The Silent Brush, where such learned styles reappear even when they are not requested. Existing evaluation methods mainly focus on near-duplicate retrieval or membership inference and do not account for this form of unintended stylistic resurfacing across prompts. To address these gaps, we first formulate guiding principles for evaluation of The Silent Brush. We then introduce Art Arena, an evaluation protocol that measures how strongly artworks are encoded, how they interact, and how frequently their stylistic traits reappear in generated outputs without explicit mention in prompts. We evaluate Art Arena on widely used text-to-image diffusion models, including Stable Diffusion v1.5, Stable Diffusion XL (SDXL), and SANA-1.5, and design it to generalize across text-to-image generative systems. Our results show that The Silent Brush arises from differences in representational strength and interaction dynamics between artworks, leading to asymmetric blending in model generations. Code and evaluation resources are available at: https://anonymous.4open.science/r/ArtArena-EBE4.

Scene text editing aims to modify text in a target region of an image while preserving surrounding background style and texture. Existing methods rely solely on image background information while neglecting the visual details of target regions, which discards stylistic features in the original text and essentially degrades the task to text rendering. Moreover, the conditions imposed by pre-trained glyph encoder limit the scope of editable text. To address these issues, this paper proposes a self-prompting scene text editing method that constructs style and glyph prompts directly from the original image, without introducing additional style or glyph encoders. We employ a two-stage training strategy: the diffusion transformer is first trained on large-scale self-supervised data and then refined using a small set of paired images. By leveraging the in-context learning capability of the Multi-Modal Diffusion Transformer (MM-DiT), it achieves open-vocabulary and style-consistent text editing. Experimental results on various languages demonstrate that our method achieves the state-of-the-art performance in both text accuracy and style consistency. Our project page: hongxiii.github.io/mstedit.

Large language models (LLMs) can convincingly imitate human writing styles, yet it remains unclear how much stylistic information is encoded in embeddings from any language model and retained after LLM rewriting. We investigate these questions in French, using a controlled literary dataset to quantify the effect of stylistic variation via changes in embedding dispersion. We observe that embeddings reliably capture authorial stylistic features and that these signals persist after rewriting, while also exhibiting LLM-specific patterns. These analytical results offer promising directions for authorship imitation detection in the era of language models.

Chord generation is an inherently constrained creative task that requires balancing stylistic diversity with music-theoretic feasibility. Existing approaches typically entangle candidate generation and constraint enforcement within a single model, making the diversity-feasibility trade-off difficult to control and interpret. In this work, we approach chord generation from a system-level perspective, introducing a Retrieval-Edit-Rerank (RER) framework that decomposes the task into three explicit stages: i) retrieval, which defines a stylistically plausible candidate space; ii) editing, which enforces music-theoretic feasibility through minimal modifications; and iii) reranking, which resolves soft preferences among feasible candidates. This separation provides a controllable pipeline, where each component addresses a distinct aspect of the generation process, thereby enhancing both the interpretability and adjustability of the output chords. Through objective metrics and subjective evaluation, our decomposed system outperforms all end-to-end chord generation baselines in balancing chord diversity and music-theoretic feasibility. Ablation studies further confirm the complementary roles of each stage in creative exploration and constraint satisfaction.

The increasing prevalence of Large Language Models (LLMs) in content creation has made distinguishing human-written textual content from LLM-generated counterparts a critical task for multimedia moderation. Existing detectors often rely on statistical cues or model-specific heuristics, making them vulnerable to paraphrasing and adversarial manipulations, and consequently limiting their robustness and interpretability. In this work, we proposeLiSCP , a novel lightweight stylistic consistency profiling method for robust detection of LLM-generated textual content, focusing on feature stability under adversarial manipulation. Our approach constructs a consistency profile that combines discrete stylistic features with continuous semantic signals, leveraging stylistic stability across multimodal-guided paraphrased text variants. Experiments spanning real-world multimedia news and movie datasets and conventional text domains demonstrate that LiSCP achieves superior performance on in-domain detection and outperforms existing approaches by up to 11.79% in cross-domain settings. Additionally,it demonstrates notable robustness under adversarial scenarios, including adversarial attacks and hybrid human-AI settings.

Large Language Models exhibit strong reasoning and semantic understanding capabilities but often hallucinate in domains that require expert knowledge, among which fabrications, the generation of factually incorrect yet fluent statements, pose the greatest risk in medical contexts. Existing medical hallucination datasets inadequately capture fabrication phenomena due to limited fabrication coverage, stylistic disparities between human and LLM-authored texts, and distributional drift during hallucinated sample synthesis. To address this, we propose a data-centric pipeline to generate realistic and word-level fabrications that preserve syntactic and stylistic fidelity while introducing subtle factual deviations, resulting in MedFabric. Building upon this dataset, we introduce ETHER, a modular word-level fabrication detector integrating Text2Table Decomposition, Word Masking and Filling and Hybrid Sentence Pair Evaluation to enhance factual alignment. Empirical results demonstrate that MedFabric outperforms state-of-the-art detectors by over 15% on word-level fabrication benchmarks while maintaining consistent performance across structural similarities, offering a comprehensive framework for reliable and domain-specific factuality detection.

Text-to-image diffusion models have revolutionized image synthesis and editing, but precise control over stylistic attributes remains a challenge, often causing unintended content modifications. We propose an approach for fine-grained parametric control of stylistic attributes in latent diffusion models by learning disentangled editing directions from synthetic datasets. We use guidance composition to close the domain gap between stylistically finetuned and foundation models, preserving the original image semantics while applying stylistic adjustments. To ensure consistent edits, we introduce a training regularization loss and enhance DDIM inversion with optimized null-conditional embeddings for real image editing. We validate our approach by learning from stylistically filtered synthetic datasets varying a range of stylistic attributes, including outlines, local contrast, watercolorization effects, and geometric patterns. Our evaluations demonstrate that compared to current text-based editing techniques, our method offers well-integrated, more precise and continuously adjustable stylistic modifications.

Differential Privacy (DP) for text matured from disjointed word-level substitutions to contiguous sentence-level rewriting by leveraging the generative capacity of language models. While this form of text privatization is best suited for balancing formal privacy guarantees with grammatical coherence, its impact on the register identity of text remains largely unexplored. By conducting a multidimensional stylistic profiling of differentially-private rewriting, we demonstrate that the cost of privacy extends far beyond lexical variation. Specifically, we find that rewriting under privacy constraints induces a systematic functional mutation of the text's communicative signature. This shift is characterized by the severe attrition of interactive markers, contextual references, and complex subordination. By comparing autoregressive paraphrasing against bidirectional substitution across a spectrum of privacy budgets, we observe that both architectures force convergence toward a non-involved and non-persuasive register. This register-blind sanitization effectively preserves semantic content but structurally homogenizes the nuanced stylistic markers that define human-authored discourse.

Stylistic personalization - making LLMs write in a specific individual's style, rather than merely adapting to task preferences - lacks evaluation grounded in authorship science. We show that grounding evaluation in authorship verification theory transforms what benchmarks can measure. Drawing on three measurement traditions - LUAR, a trained authorship verification model; an LLM-as-judge with decoupled trait matching; and classical function-word stylometrics - we evaluate four inference-time personalization methods across 50 authors and 1,000 generations. The theory-grounded metric, LUAR, provides what ad hoc alternatives cannot: calibrated baselines, with a human ceiling of 0.756 and a cross-author floor of 0.626, that give scores absolute meaning. All methods score below this floor, from 0.484 to 0.508, exposing an authorship gap invisible to uncalibrated metrics. The three metrics produce near-zero pairwise correlations, with absolute r less than 0.07, confirming that without theoretical grounding, metric choice determines conclusions: an LLM judge declares a clear winner while LUAR finds no meaningful differentiation. These findings demonstrate the theory-benchmark cycle in action: authorship theory exposes evaluation failures that ad hoc benchmarks miss.

Despite the growing use of large language models (LLMs) for writing tasks, users may hesitate to rely on LLMs when personal style is important. Post-editing LLM-generated drafts or translations is a common collaborative writing strategy, but it remains unclear whether users can effectively reshape LLM-generated text to reflect their personal style. We conduct a pre-registered online study ($n=81$) in which participants post-edit LLM-generated drafts for writing tasks where personal style matters to them. Using embedding-based style similarity metrics, we find that post-editing increases stylistic similarity to participants' unassisted writing and reduces similarity to fully LLM-generated output. However, post-edited text still remains stylistically closer in style to LLM text than to participants' unassisted control text, and it exhibits reduced stylistic diversity compared to unassisted human text. We find a gap between perceived stylistic authenticity and model-measured stylistic similarity, with post-edited text often perceived as representative of participants' personal style despite remaining detectable LLM stylistic traces.

We present an audio-to-analysis pipeline that produces composer-level information-theoretic profiles : reflecting compositional vocabulary as it emerges from aggregated performances : from raw recordings, built on a transcription layer whose accuracy we certify on a standard benchmark (F1 = 0.9791 on the MAESTRO v3.0.0 test set). Applied to 1,238 pieces and 15 MAESTRO composers with at least ten attributed pieces, spanning the Baroque through the early twentieth century, the pipeline derives empirical distributions over harmonic scale degrees and analyzes them through Shannon entropy, asymmetric Kullback-Leibler divergence, and Zipfian rank-frequency modeling. The resulting profiles (i) order composers along an interpretable axis of harmonic predictability, with a narrow entropy range (3.33-3.86 bits) that reveals the marginal-level similarity of tonal vocabularies; (ii) recover known stylistic lineages (Haydn-Beethoven, Liszt-Rachmaninoff, Schubert-Schumann) through the smallest KL divergences in the corpus, with Mendelssohn emerging as a stable outlier within this corpus; and (iii) separate contemporary neoclassical artists (Richter, Frahm, Glass, Arnalds, Jóhannsson) from historical composers on the quality of Zipfian fit to the transition distribution, with mean $R^2 = 0.78$ for neoclassical versus 0.46 for historical (N $\geq$ 10 pieces each). This gap is larger than the spread within either group and is consistent with a minimalist compositional tendency: a compact transition vocabulary used with sharper frequency-rank regularity than historical composers. All estimates are reported with Laplace-smoothed bootstrap 95% confidence intervals.

The evaluation of narrative quality remains a complex challenge, as it involves subjective factors such as plot, character development, and emotional impact. This work proposes a quantitative approach to narrative assessment by focusing on the linguistic dimension as a primary indicator of quality. The paper presents a methodology for the automatic evaluation of narrative based on the extraction of a comprehensive set of 33 quantitative linguistic features categorized into lexical, syntactic, and semantic groups. To test the model, an experiment was conducted on a specialized corpus of 23 books, including canonical masterpieces and self-published works. Through a similarity matrix, the system successfully clustered the narratives, distinguishing almost perfectly between professionally edited and self-published texts. Furthermore, the methodology was validated against a human-annotated dataset; it significantly outperforms traditional story-level evaluation metrics, demonstrating the effectiveness of quantitative linguistic features in assessing narrative quality.

The Adversarial Humanities Benchmark (AHB) evaluates whether model safety refusals survive a shift away from familiar harmful prompt forms. Starting from harmful tasks drawn from MLCommons AILuminate, the benchmark rewrites the same objectives through humanities-style transformations while preserving intent. This extends literature on Adversarial Poetry and Adversarial Tales from single jailbreak operators to a broader benchmark family of stylistic obfuscation and goal concealment. In the benchmark results reported here, the original attacks record 3.84% attack success rate (ASR), while transformed methods range from 36.8% to 65.0%, yielding 55.75% overall ASR across 31 frontier models. Under a European Union AI Act Code-of-Practice-inspired systemic-risk lens, Chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear (CBRN) is the highest bucket. Taken together, this lack of stylistic robustness suggests that current safety techniques suffer from weak generalization: deep understanding of 'non-maleficence' remains a central unresolved problem in frontier model safety.

Empirical studies of recorded performance have conventionally modelled tempo change as a unidirectional historical process, fitting linear regression lines to tempo data plotted against recording year. This paper argues that such approaches impose a false narrative of uniform stylistic evolution on what is, in fact, a plurality of coexisting interpretive traditions. Applying k-means clustering (k=3) to bar-level BPM data from over one hundred recordings of Beethoven's five piano and cello sonatas (Op. 5 Nos. 1 and 2; Op. 69; Op. 102 Nos. 1 and 2) spanning 1930-2012, this study reveals that every movement supports at least two, and usually three, discrete tempo traditions (slow, mid-range, and fast), whose internal regression slopes are negligible (R-squared <= 0.25 in all but one case), demonstrating that each tradition is independently stable across eight decades. The mid-range cluster dominates in all movements, typically comprising 55-70% of recordings. A slow cluster is absent from fast-character movements (Op. 5 Rondos, Op. 69 Scherzo), reflecting a shared rhetorical consensus about their character. The single case of significant intra-cluster drift (Op. 102 No. 1 Allegro con brio, R-squared=0.246, p=0.013) indicates a moderate mid-range deceleration of approximately 3.2 BPM across the study period. No correlation is found between cluster membership and performers' generational, national, or pedagogical backgrounds, suggesting that tempo tradition reflects individual interpretive choice rather than collective cultural inheritance. The paper proposes an ecological model of stylistic change - coexisting traditions shifting in relative prevalence rather than a single tradition evolving - and argues that this reframing has broad implications for how empirical performance studies interpret corpus-level tempo data.

Tone style transfer for photo retouching aims to adapt the stylistic tone of the reference image to a given content image. However, the lack of high-quality large-scale triplet datasets with stylized ground truth forces existing methods to rely on self-supervised or proxy objectives, which limits model capability. To mitigate this gap, we design a data construction pipeline to build TST100K, a large-scale dataset of 100,000 content-reference-stylized triplets. At the core of this pipeline, we train a tone style scorer to ensure strict stylistic consistency for each triplet. In addition, existing methods typically extract content and reference features independently and then fuse them in a decoder, which may cause semantic loss and lead to inappropriate color transfer and degraded visual aesthetics. Instead, we propose ICTone, a diffusion-based framework that performs tone transfer in an in-context manner by jointly conditioning on both images, leveraging the semantic priors of generative models for semantic-aware transfer. Reward feedback learning using the tone style scorer is further incorporated to improve stylistic fidelity and visual quality. Experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of TST100K, and ICTone achieves state-of-the-art performance on both quantitative metrics and human evaluations.

One of the dominant paradigms in self-supervised learning (SSL), illustrated by MoCo or DINO, aims to produce robust representations by capturing features that are insensitive to certain image transformations such as illumination, or geometric changes. This strategy is appropriate when the objective is to recognize objects independently of their appearance. However, it becomes counterproductive as soon as appearance itself constitutes the discriminative signal. In weather analysis, for example, rain streaks, snow granularity, atmospheric scattering, as well as reflections and halos, are not noise: they carry the essential information. In critical applications such as autonomous driving, ignoring these cues is risky, since grip and visibility depend directly on ground conditions and atmospheric conditions. We introduce ST-STORM, a hybrid SSL framework that treats appearance (style) as a semantic modality to be disentangled from content. Our architecture explicitly separates two latent streams, regulated by gating mechanisms. The Content branch aims at a stable semantic representation through a JEPA scheme coupled with a contrastive objective, promoting invariance to appearance variations. In parallel, the Style branch is constrained to capture appearance signatures (textures, contrasts, scattering) through feature prediction and reconstruction under an adversarial constraint. We evaluate ST-STORM on several tasks, including object classification (ImageNet-1K), fine-grained weather characterization, and melanoma detection (ISIC 2024 Challenge). The results show that the Style branch effectively isolates complex appearance phenomena (F1=97% on Multi-Weather and F1=94% on ISIC 2024 with 10% labeled data), without degrading the semantic performance (F1=80% on ImageNet-1K) of the Content branch, and improves the preservation of critical appearance

The prevalence of rapidly evolving slang, neologisms, and highly stylized expressions in informal user-generated text, particularly on Chinese social media, poses significant challenges for Machine Translation (MT) benchmarking. Specifically, we identify two primary obstacles: (1) data scarcity, as high-quality parallel data requires bilingual annotators familiar with platform-specific slang, and stylistic cues in both languages; and (2) metric limitations, where traditional evaluators like COMET often fail to capture stylistic fidelity and nonstandard expressions. To bridge these gaps, we introduce CSM-MTBench, a benchmark covering five Chinese-foreign language directions and consisting of two expert-curated subsets: Fun Posts, featuring context-rich, slang- and neologism-heavy content, and Social Snippets, emphasizing concise, emotion- and style- driven expressions. Furthermore, we propose tailored evaluation approaches for each subset: measuring the translation success rate of slang and neologisms in Fun Posts, while assessing tone and style preservation in Social Snippets via a hybrid of embedding-based metrics and LLM-as-a-judge. Experiments on over 20 models reveal substantial variation in how current MT systems handle semantic fidelity and informal, social-media-specific stylistic cues. CSM-MTBench thus serves as a rigorous testbed for advancing MT systems capable of mastering real-world Chinese social media texts.

We present a framework for document-centric background generation with multi-page editing and thematic continuity. To ensure text regions remain readable, we employ a latent masking formulation that softly attenuates updates in the diffusion space, inspired by smooth barrier functions in physics and numerical optimization. In addition, we introduce Automated Readability Optimization (ARO), which automatically places semi-transparent, rounded backing shapes behind text regions. ARO determines the minimal opacity needed to satisfy perceptual contrast standards (WCAG 2.2) relative to the underlying background, ensuring readability while maintaining aesthetic harmony without human intervention. Multi-page consistency is maintained through a summarization-and-instruction process, where each page is distilled into a compact representation that recursively guides subsequent generations. This design reflects how humans build continuity by retaining prior context, ensuring that visual motifs evolve coherently across an entire document. Our method further treats a document as a structured composition in which text, figures, and backgrounds are preserved or regenerated as separate layers, allowing targeted background editing without compromising readability. Finally, user-provided prompts allow stylistic adjustments in color and texture, balancing automated consistency with flexible customization. Our training-free framework produces visually coherent, text-preserving, and thematically aligned documents, bridging generative modeling with natural design workflows.

With the surge of large language models (LLMs) and their ability to produce customized output, style-personalized text generation--"write like me"--has become a rapidly growing area of interest. However, style personalization is highly specific, relative to every user, and depends strongly on the pragmatic context, which makes it uniquely challenging. Although prior research has introduced benchmarks and metrics for this area, they tend to be non-standardized and have known limitations (e.g., poor correlation with human subjects). LLMs have been found to not capture author-specific style well, it follows that the metrics themselves must be scrutinized carefully. In this work we critically examine the effectiveness of the most common metrics used in the field, such as BLEU, embeddings, and LLMs-as-judges. We evaluate these metrics using our proposed style discrimination benchmark, which spans eight diverse writing tasks across three evaluation settings: domain discrimination, authorship attribution, and LLM-generated personalized vs non-personalized discrimination. We find strong evidence that employing ensembles of diverse evaluation metrics consistently outperforms single-evaluator methods, and conclude by providing guidance on how to reliably assess style-personalized text generation.