Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Published: |
2025
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.09056 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1866913836498419712 |
|---|---|
| author | Smith, Brandon Bouadjenek, Mohamed Reda Kheya, Tahsin Alamgir Dawson, Phillip Aryal, Sunil |
| author_facet | Smith, Brandon Bouadjenek, Mohamed Reda Kheya, Tahsin Alamgir Dawson, Phillip Aryal, Sunil |
| contents | Large Language Models (LLMs) represent a major step toward artificial general intelligence, significantly advancing our ability to interact with technology. While LLMs perform well on Natural Language Processing tasks -- such as translation, generation, code writing, and summarization -- questions remain about their output similarity, variability, and ethical implications. For instance, how similar are texts generated by the same model? How does this compare across different models? And which models best uphold ethical standards? To investigate, we used 5{,}000 prompts spanning diverse tasks like generation, explanation, and rewriting. This resulted in approximately 3 million texts from 12 LLMs, including proprietary and open-source systems from OpenAI, Google, Microsoft, Meta, and Mistral. Key findings include: (1) outputs from the same LLM are more similar to each other than to human-written texts; (2) models like WizardLM-2-8x22b generate highly similar outputs, while GPT-4 produces more varied responses; (3) LLM writing styles differ significantly, with Llama 3 and Mistral showing higher similarity, and GPT-4 standing out for distinctiveness; (4) differences in vocabulary and tone underscore the linguistic uniqueness of LLM-generated content; (5) some LLMs demonstrate greater gender balance and reduced bias. These results offer new insights into the behavior and diversity of LLM outputs, helping guide future development and ethical evaluation. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2505_09056 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2025 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | A Comprehensive Analysis of Large Language Model Outputs: Similarity, Diversity, and Bias Smith, Brandon Bouadjenek, Mohamed Reda Kheya, Tahsin Alamgir Dawson, Phillip Aryal, Sunil Computation and Language Large Language Models (LLMs) represent a major step toward artificial general intelligence, significantly advancing our ability to interact with technology. While LLMs perform well on Natural Language Processing tasks -- such as translation, generation, code writing, and summarization -- questions remain about their output similarity, variability, and ethical implications. For instance, how similar are texts generated by the same model? How does this compare across different models? And which models best uphold ethical standards? To investigate, we used 5{,}000 prompts spanning diverse tasks like generation, explanation, and rewriting. This resulted in approximately 3 million texts from 12 LLMs, including proprietary and open-source systems from OpenAI, Google, Microsoft, Meta, and Mistral. Key findings include: (1) outputs from the same LLM are more similar to each other than to human-written texts; (2) models like WizardLM-2-8x22b generate highly similar outputs, while GPT-4 produces more varied responses; (3) LLM writing styles differ significantly, with Llama 3 and Mistral showing higher similarity, and GPT-4 standing out for distinctiveness; (4) differences in vocabulary and tone underscore the linguistic uniqueness of LLM-generated content; (5) some LLMs demonstrate greater gender balance and reduced bias. These results offer new insights into the behavior and diversity of LLM outputs, helping guide future development and ethical evaluation. |
| title | A Comprehensive Analysis of Large Language Model Outputs: Similarity, Diversity, and Bias |
| topic | Computation and Language |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.09056 |