Frankentext: Stitching random text fragments into long-form narratives
Chau Minh Pham, Jenna Russell, Dzung Pham, Mohit Iyyer
Abstract
We introduce Frankentexts, a long-form narrative generation paradigm that treats an LLM as a composer of existing texts rather than as an author. Given a writing prompt and thousands of randomly sampled human-written snippets, the model is asked to produce a narrative under the extreme constraint that most tokens (e.g., 90%) must be copied verbatim from the provided paragraphs. This task is effectively intractable for humans: selecting and ordering snippets yields a combinatorial search space that an LLM implicitly explores, before minimally editing and stitching together selected fragments into a coherent long-form story. Despite the extreme challenge of the task, we observe through extensive automatic and human evaluation that Frankentexts significantly improve over vanilla LLM generations in terms of writing quality, diversity, and originality while remaining coherent and relevant to the prompt. Furthermore, Frankentexts pose a fundamental challenge to detectors of AI-generated text: 72% of Frankentexts produced by our best Gemini 2.5 Pro configuration are misclassified as human-written by Pangram, a state-of-the-art detector. Human annotators praise Frankentexts for their inventive premises, vivid descriptions, and dry humor; on the other hand, they identify issues with abrupt tonal shifts and uneven grammar across segments, particularly in longer pieces. The emergence of high-quality Frankentexts raises serious questions about authorship and copyright: when humans provide the raw materials and LLMs orchestrate them into new narratives, who truly owns the result?
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 6b5784bf-735b-4fba-bb9e-3bd7eac1f4d3Builds on21
- Reflexion: language agents with verbal reinforcement learningNoah Shinn, Federico Cassano, Ashwin Gopinath, Karthik Narasimhan et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 5,828 citations
- Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-FeedbackAman Madaan, Niket Tandon, Prakhar Gupta, Skyler Hallinan et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 4,972 citations
- DetectGPT: Zero-Shot Machine-Generated Text Detection using Probability CurvatureEric Mitchell, Yoonho Lee, Alexander Khazatsky, Christopher D. Manning et al.ICML 2023 · 988 citations
- A Watermark for Large Language ModelsJohn Kirchenbauer, Jonas Geiping, Yuxin Wen, Jonathan Katz et al.ICML 2023 · 854 citations
- Paraphrasing evades detectors of AI-generated text, but retrieval is an effective defenseKalpesh Krishna, Yixiao Song, Marzena Karpinska, John Wieting et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 657 citations
Related papers
- MAGE: Machine-generated Text Detection in the WildYafu Li, Qintong Li, Leyang Cui, Wei Bi et al.ACL 2024 · 44 citations
- PaLD: Detection of Text Partially Written by Large Language ModelsEric Lei, Hsiang Hsu, Chun-Fu ChenICLR 2025
- DeTeCtive: Detecting AI-generated Text via Multi-Level Contrastive LearningXun Guo, Yongxin He, Shan Zhang, Ting Zhang et al.NeurIPS 2024 · 100 citations
- People who frequently use ChatGPT for writing tasks are accurate and robust detectors of AI-generated textJenna Russell, Marzena Karpinska, Mohit IyyerACL 2025 · 39 citations
- Is Human-Like Text Liked by Humans? Multilingual Human Detection and Preference Against AIYuxia Wang, Rui Xing, Jonibek Mansurov, Giovanni Puccetti et al.ACL 2026 · 3 citations
