← 研踪 PaperTrailACL Anthology · ACL 2026:acl:2026.acl-long.746 · 记录 #1
Narrative License and Model Sycophancy in LLM Summaries of Scientific Work
来源日期（仅到月份） 2026-07
来源记录日期 2026-07
雷达观测 2026-11-01 22:00
摘要
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to summarize academic work, yet model summaries can subtly exaggerate or mischaracterize findings. We examine how Narrative License (NL), rhetorical shifts that amplify claims beyond the underlying evidence, emerges in LLM summaries of scholarly articles. Using diverse prompting strategies across six leading models, we assess three dimensions of NL: causal overreach, rhetorical confidence, and sentiment (N = 100 peer-reviewed articles). Under basic summarization prompts, models frequently increase NL relative to academic abstracts; however, guardrail prompts can reduce these distortions. We further test how model “sycophancy” shapes NL, finding that stated stances and user personas produce predictable shifts in each element. These findings suggest that users and the benchmarks used to evaluate summarization should explicitly consider subtle rhetorical distortions and user alignment to ensure faithful scientific communication.
论文发现出处
这些页面提供论文线索，不代表同行评审或质量认证。
观测到的版本
平台记录号代表本站观测到的元数据变化，不是作者修订号。来源日期仅到月份或年份时，按该月或该年首日存档。
记录 #1 · 2026-07 · 最新观测版本
Narrative License and Model Sycophancy in LLM Summaries of Scientific Work
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to summarize academic work, yet model summaries can subtly exaggerate or mischaracterize findings. We examine how Narrative License (NL), rhetorical shifts that amplify claims beyond the underlying evidence, emerges in LLM summaries of scholarly articles. Using diverse prompting strategies across six leading models, we assess three dimensions of NL: causal overreach, rhetorical confidence, and sentiment (N = 100 peer-reviewed articles). Under basic summarization prompts, models frequently increase NL relative to academic abstracts; however, guardrail prompts can reduce these distortions. We further test how model “sycophancy” shapes NL, finding that stated stances and user personas produce predictable shifts in each element. These findings suggest that users and the benchmarks used to evaluate summarization should explicitly consider subtle rhetorical distortions and user alignment to ensure faithful scientific communication.
查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗