CraftAlign is introduced, a framework that aligns AI stories with the craft of human storytelling by both assessing Human/AI writing patterns and providing revision guidance by both assessing Human/AI writing patterns and providing revision guidance.
Abstract
Large language models can now generate fluent and complete stories, yet many outputs still feel formulaic and unnatural because of cliches, over-explanation, linear causal progression, and stereotyped endings, an immediately recognizable AI flavor. Existing detection and evaluation methods often stop at source labels or holistic scores, while revision methods typically target predefined issues through localized edits, limiting their ability to support multiple plausible revision strategies or guide story-wide changes in information release, causal organization, and ending treatment. We introduce CraftAlign, a framework that aligns AI stories with the craft of human storytelling by both assessing Human/AI writing patterns and providing revision guidance. CraftAlign comprises two learned modules and an inference-time guidance pipeline. A feature estimator built on Qwen3.5-9B predicts 304 explicit writing features spanning style and narrative. A class-conditional energy model scores the resulting feature configuration against Human and AI writing patterns, conditioning on the original writing prompt when available. At inference time, CraftAlign applies schema-valid structured perturbations, selects changes that move the feature configuration toward the Human writing pattern, and converts them into natural-language guidance for a separate editor to rewrite the full story. Experiments show that CraftAlign accurately distinguishes Human and AI writing patterns and that its guidance outperforms revision baselines across editors and in a human study.
A sequential behavioral alignment framework pairing fine-tuning with preference optimization over paired correct and counterfactual rationales is developed and applied, demonstrating that behavioral alignment mitigates bidirectional rationalization while delivering human-interpretable reasoning traces without manual pipeline overhead.
Alireza S. Ziabari, Kat Ellis, Colleen E. Chan et al.· 0 citations
This framework proposes a context-editing framework that performs selective abstraction over entities that appear in both the context and the question, establishing symbolic abstraction as a highly cost-efficient solution for ensuring context fidelity in LLMs.
Rounak Sharma, Debabrata Mahapatra, S. Saini· Annual International ACM SIG...· 0 citations
This survey examines the problem as narrative consistency, defined as the task-conditioned preservation of binding propositions in the operative narrative state, and introduces a four-category, fourteen-subtype taxonomy comprising World and Setting, Character-Agentive, Event-Structural, and Narration and Discourse categories.
Keunhyeung Park, Seunguk Yu, Jinhee Jang et al.· IEEE Access· 0 citations
Large Language Models (LLMs) have been rapidly evolving lately, resulting in the need for strong, explainable models to detect the difference between human-generated and machine-generated articles. Existing approaches which are mostly based on fine-tuned transformers suffer from several drawbacks such as rapid obsolescence, paraphrasing attacks, and lack of interpretability. To improve their ability to detect, this paper proposes a novel paradigm called Human vs. LLM Identification (HLI) which introduces a Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG)-inspired evidence-based detection strategy alongside a fine-tuned transformer classifier. Our core model, DeBERTa-Sentinel, is built on top of a fine-tuned Microsoft DeBERTa-v3-small model, which uses a disentangled attention mechanism to better capture subtle syntactic and stylistic deviations characteristic of AI-generated text. We evaluate our framework on a balanced dataset of 43,456 text samples, curated from the OpenGPTText corpus and covering AI-generated and human-authored content across diverse domains including news, education, and creative text. The experimental results show improved performance over the selected baselines, with our framework achieving an accuracy of 97.53%, precision of 95.89%, recall of 99.34%, and ROC-AUC of 99.53%. In addition, explainability is integrated into our framework through Local Interpretable Model-agnostic Explanations (LIME) analysis, providing token-level insight into classification decisions. This study establishes a benchmark for scalable, explainable AI text detection, with implications for academic integrity, content moderation, and combating misinformation.
Ibtasam Ur Rehman, Muhammad Islam, Muhammad Yousaf Rehman et al.· Knowledge· 0 citations
Initial human feedback reveals that AI-written novels contain interesting descriptions and concepts, but often fail in long-range coherence and prose quality, including conceptual repetition, distracting details, and weak dialogues.
The exponential growth of scientific literature has intensified the demand for automated summarization systems capable of producing abstracts that are both linguistically fluent and factually reliable. Existing approaches face a fundamental trade-off: encoder-decoder models such as BART and T5 maintain strong factual grounding but produce rigid, extractive outputs, while decoder-only large language models (LLMs) such as Llama and Gemma generate highly fluent text yet remain susceptible to hallucination. This paper proposes a two-stage Synergistic Hybrid Ensemble framework designed to resolve this dichotomy. In Stage 1, a fine-tuned BART-Large model generates a factually grounded scaffold draft from a structured input representation comprising the document title, key sentences, method highlights, and results summary. In Stage 2, a QLoRA-adapted Llama-3.2-1B model performs coherent rewriting and stylistic polishing by conditioning on both the scaffold draft and the original source document. Experiments conducted on the arXiv Scientific Research Papers Dataset using BERTScore and entailment-based Factual Consistency metrics demonstrate that the proposed ensemble achieves a Factual Consistency metrics demonstrate that the proposed ensemble achieves a Factual Consistency score of 0.9140, substantially outperforming BART-Large (0.2890) and Llama-3.2-1B (0.6630) individually. Although the ensemble incurs a marginal reduction in BERTScore (0.8980) relative to Llama-3.2-1B (0.9555), this trade-off is justified given the critical importance of factual reliability in high-stakes scientific discourse. These findings confirm that anchoring the generative capacity of decoder-only LLMs to verified factual scaffolds effectively mitigates hallucination risk, offering a scalable and reproducible solution for high-fidelity scientific abstract generation.
Geoffrey Antonio Arifin, Andrew Widyanata, Henry Lucky et al.· International Conference on...· 0 citations