Lune

ACL Findings2025

Domain Regeneration: How well do LLMs match syntactic properties of text domains?

Da Ju, Hagen Blix, Adina Williams

Abstract

Recent improvements in large language model performance have, in all likelihood, been accompanied by improvements in how well they can approximate the distribution of their training data. In this work, we explore the following question: which properties of text domains do LLMs faithfully approximate, and how well do they do so? Applying observational approaches familiar from corpus linguistics, we prompt commonly used, opensource LLMs to regenerate text from three domains of permissively licensed English text which are often contained in LLM training data-Wikipedia, news text, and ELI5. In a fairly semantically-controlled setting, this regeneration paradigm allows us to investigate whether LLMs can faithfully match original human text domains. We investigate varying levels of syntactic abstraction, from simpler properties like sentence length, and article readability, to more complex and higher order properties such as dependency tag distribution, parse depth, and parse complexity. We find that the majority of the regenerated distributions show a shifted mean, a lower standard deviation, and a reduction of the long tail, as compared to the human originals.

Ask Lune

Ask anything. The answer quotes the paper.

Lune reads all of it and the papers around it, then shows you the passages behind every answer.

Questions to start from

Lune answers from

the full paper · 1 top-tier paper that cites it · related work

Get the answer

Free to start. No credit card required.

Cited by top-tier papers1

  1. Learning the Wrong Lessons: Syntactic-Domain Spurious Correlations in Language ModelsChantal Shaib, Vinith M. Suriyakumar, Byron C. Wallace, Marzyeh GhassemiNeurIPS 2025 · 8 citations

Builds on10

  1. Efficient Memory Management for Large Language Model Serving with PagedAttentionWoosuk Kwon, Zhuohan Li, Siyuan Zhuang, Ying Sheng et al.SOSP 2023 · 1,016 citations
  2. Adversarial NLI: A New Benchmark for Natural Language UnderstandingYixin Nie, Adina Williams, Emily Dinan, Mohit Bansal et al.ACL 2020 · 602 citations
  3. Does Writing with Language Models Reduce Content Diversity?Vishakh Padmakumar, He HeICLR 2024 · 173 citations
  4. WikiChat: Stopping the Hallucination of Large Language Model Chatbots by Few-Shot Grounding on WikipediaSina J. Semnani, Violet Z. Yao, Heidi C. Zhang, Monica S. LamEMNLP Findings 2023 · 44 citations
  5. 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

Related papers

  1. Recursive Training Loops in LLMs: How training data properties modulate distribution shift in generated data?Grgur Kovac, Jérémy Perez, Rémy Portelas, Peter Ford Dominey et al.EMNLP 2025
  2. Are Language Models Any Good at Density Modeling?Sriram Ranga, Sai Shashank Bedampeta, Rui Mao, Anupam ChattopadhyayAAAI 2026
  3. Linguistic and Embedding-Based Profiling of Texts Generated by Humans and Large Language ModelsSergio E. Zanotto, Segun AroyehunEMNLP 2025 · 3 citations
  4. Eliciting Numerical Predictive Distributions of LLMs Without Auto-RegressionJulianna Piskorz, Kasia Kobalczyk, Mihaela van der SchaarICLR 2026 · 2 citations
  5. Natural Context Drift Undermines the Natural Language Understanding of Large Language ModelsYulong Wu, Viktor Schlegel, Riza Batista-NavarroEMNLP Findings 2025
Dusk over the sea between two cliffs drawn in fine vertical lines