资讯

How Well Can Large Language Models Impersonate Individual Authors? A Comparative Evaluation

📅 2026-11-05 ⏱️ 约 7 分钟阅读 ✍️ AI导航编辑部 🔗 arxiv.org
How Well Can Large Language Models Impersonate Individual Authors? A Comparative Evaluation
📝 内容摘要

Computer Science > Computation and Language [Submitted on 4 Nov 2026] Title:How Well Can Large Language Models Imp

📌 核心要点

  • Computer Science > Computation and Language
  • [Submitted on 4 Nov 2026]
  • From: Shunichi Ishihara [view email][v1] Wed, 4 Nov 2026 00:22:54 UTC (7,659 KB)

Computer Science > Computation and Language

[Submitted on 4 Nov 2026]

Title:How Well Can Large Language Models Impersonate Individual Authors? A Comparative Evaluation

View PDFAbstract:This study investigates the authorship impersonation capacity of six widely used large language models (LLMs): Gemini 3 Pro, Claude Opus, GPT 5.2, GPT 5.2 Pro, DeepSeek 3.2, and Grok 4.1 Fast. The evaluation was conducted using short product review texts selected to ensure high within author consistency in individual writing style. Two types of in context prompt were designed: a simple prompt with minimal instruction and a complex prompt incorporating explicit stylometric guidance for mimicry. Authorship mimicry was evaluated using a cosine distance based distance to training metric, supplemented by visual analyses of embedding distributions. The results indicate that authorship impersonation remained challenging for most LLMs, with Gemini 3 Pro showing the strongest apparent mimicry performance. However, subsequent overlap analysis revealed that Gemini 3 Pro extensively copied and reused sentences and phrases from the training texts, at levels far exceeding those observed among human authors. Follow up factor analyses showed that training set consistency was the most robust predictor of mimicry success across models, whereas author distinctiveness did not generalise as a reliable predictor. Global embedding visualisations further revealed a consistent macro level pattern: for most models, generated texts occupied regions of the embedding space that were largely separated from the corresponding human training clusters. This indicates limited convergence towards target author style and suggests the presence of model specific lexical and phraseological preferences. The findings highlight the importance of distinguishing genuine stylistic imitation from direct textual reuse and have implications for the forensic analysis of textual evidence involving potential LLM enabled impersonation.

Submission history

From: Shunichi Ishihara [view email][v1] Wed, 4 Nov 2026 00:22:54 UTC (7,659 KB)

Additional Features

References & Citations

Loading...

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)

Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)

Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)

scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)

CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)

DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)

Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)

Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)

ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)

Demos

Recommenders and Search Tools

Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)

CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

来源arxiv.org· 本文为编辑整理,仅供参考