How to remove trendy speech from llms?
Summary
A user asks how to remove trendy or unnatural speech patterns from large language models, providing examples and inquiring about effective system prompts to encourage more literal responses.
Similar Articles
Are you speaking my languages? On spoken language adherence in multimodal LLMs
This paper addresses the problem of spoken language adherence in multimodal LLMs for ASR, proposing a soft prompting approach and novel metric to quantify language violations. It evaluates three mitigation strategies—zero-shot prompting, supervised fine-tuning, and chain-of-thought reasoning—across multiple languages to improve transcription fidelity.
Once a Response, Always a Response: Detecting LLM-generated Text via Latent Prompt Restoration
This paper proposes EchoPrompt, a training-free detector for LLM-generated text that restores a latent prompt dependency by prepending a generic prefix and measuring likelihood gain differences between instruction-tuned and base models, achieving state-of-the-art zero-shot detection performance.
Interpreting Style Representations via Style-Eliciting Prompts
This paper proposes a framework to interpret style representations by using style-eliciting prompts—natural language instructions that steer LLMs to generate text with specific stylistic attributes. The method outperforms baseline LLM prompting techniques in both describing and imitating writing styles.
The Rise of Verbal Tics in Large Language Models: A Systematic Analysis Across Frontier Models
A systematic study of repetitive, formulaic verbal tics in eight frontier LLMs, introducing the Verbal Tic Index (VTI) and revealing significant inter-model variation and negative impact on perceived naturalness.
PromptPrint: Behavioral Biometrics Through Natural Language Prompting in LLMs
Introduces PromptPrint, a systematic study showing that users' habitual vocabulary and syntax in LLM prompts form a learnable behavioral biometric, with lexical features outperforming semantic encoders and revealing a uniqueness–consistency paradox.