Style representation learning is a powerful tool for authorship analysis and modeling writing style, yet the latent nature of learned representations makes them difficult to interpret. Recent work has attempted to explain these representations by generating natural language descriptions with large language models (LLMs) conditioned on input text. However, such descriptions are often prone to the LLM’s biases and hallucinations, and they lack an explicit objective and practical utility. In this work, we propose a novel framework for interpreting style representations through style-eliciting prompts: natural language instructions designed to steer LLMs to generate text that reflects specific stylistic attributes. We curate 1,010 distinct style features spanning 26 stylistic categories and construct a dataset by prompting an LLM to generate text conditioned on these features. Using this data, we train a decoder to generate a style prompt from the style representation of the generated text. We evaluate our approach on three tasks: (1) recovering original style prompts from generated text, (2) generating text in the same style using the recovered prompts, and (3) steering LLM outputs to match the style of human-written texts. Experiments demonstrate that our method consistently outperforms strong baselines that directly prompt LLMs with target text, achieving superior performance in both style description and style imitation. These results highlight style-eliciting prompts can provide a practical and interpretable interface to stylistic information encoded in style representations.

Building datasets for dialogue tasks is expensive and time-consuming, requiring recruitment, training, and data collection from study participants. In response, much recent work has sought to use large language models (LLMs) to simulate both human-human and human-LLM interactions, as they have been shown to generate convincingly human-like text in many settings. However, how well do LLM-based simulations reflect real human dialogue? In this work, we answer this question by generating a large-scale dataset of 100,000 paired LLM-LLM and human-LLM dialogues from the WildChat dataset and quantifying how well the LLM simulations align with their human counterparts. Overall, we find relatively low alignment between simulations and human interactions, with systematic differences in multiple textual properties, including style and conversational dynamics. Further, we find that models perform similarly in simulating English, Chinese, and Russian dialogues. Our results also suggest that LLMs only simulate a narrow range of the overall distribution of human dialogue, as they perform better on the subset of humans who write similarly to the LLM’s own style.

Authorship representation (AR) learning, which models an author’s unique writing style, has demonstrated strong performance in authorship attribution tasks. However, prior research has primarily focused on monolingual settings—mostly in English—leaving the potential benefits of multilingual AR models underexplored. We introduce a novel method for multilingual AR learning that incorporates two key innovations: probabilistic content masking, which encourages the model to focus on stylistically indicative words rather than content-specific words, and language-aware batching, which improves contrastive learning by reducing cross-lingual interference. Our model is trained on over 4.5 million authors across 36 languages and 13 domains. It consistently outperforms monolingual baselines in 21 out of 22 non-English languages, achieving an average Recall@8 improvement of 4.85%, with a maximum gain of 15.91% in a single language. Furthermore, it exhibits stronger cross-lingual and cross-domain generalization compared to a monolingual model trained solely on English. Our analysis confirms the effectiveness of both proposed techniques, highlighting their critical roles in the model’s improved performance.

Natural Language Processing (NLP) models tend to inherit and amplify stereotypical biases present in their training data, leading to harmful societal consequences. Current efforts to rectify these biases typically revolve around making models oblivious to bias, which is at odds with the idea that humans require increased awareness to tackle these biases better. This prompts a fundamental research question: are bias-oblivious models the only viable solution to combat stereotypical biases? This paper answers this question by proposing the Agency-BeLiefs Embedding (ABLE) model, a novel approach that actively encodes stereotypical biases into the embedding space. ABLE draws upon social psychological theory to acquire and represent stereotypical biases in the form of agency and belief scores rather than directly representing stereotyped groups. Our experimental results showcase ABLE’s effectiveness in learning agency and belief stereotypes while preserving the language model’s proficiency. Furthermore, we underscore the practical significance of incorporating stereotypes within the ABLE model by demonstrating its utility in various downstream tasks. Our approach exemplifies the potential benefits of addressing bias through awareness, as opposed to the prevailing approach of mitigating bias through obliviousness.

Biases cause discrepancies in healthcare services. Race, gender, and age of a patient affect interactions with physicians and the medical treatments one receives. These biases in clinical practices can be amplified following the release of pre-trained language models trained on biomedical corpora. To bring awareness to such repercussions, we examine social biases present in the biomedical masked language models. We curate prompts based on evidence-based practice and compare generated diagnoses based on biases. For a case study, we measure bias in diagnosing coronary artery disease and using cardiovascular procedures based on bias. Our study demonstrates that biomedical models are less biased than BERT in gender, while the opposite is true for race and age.