arXiv (All)
open access
The human-authorship halo: attribution bias in literary style evaluation by humans and AI
As AI writing tools become widespread, we need to understand how both humans and machines evaluate literary style, a domain where objective standards are elusive and judgments are inherently subjective. We conducted controlled experiments using Raymond Queneau's Exercises in Style (1947) to measure
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- "Is This Book AI-Generated?" How Authorship Suspicion Manifests in Marketplace Reviews#1119023
- Literature, Genre Fiction, and Standards of Criticism#739008
- Attribution Quality in AI-Generated Content:Benchmarking Style Embeddings and LLM Judges#984078
- When AI Blurs the Boundaries of Contribution: An Empirical Study of Authorship Calibration#373437
- Hidden Prompts in Manuscripts Exploit AI-Assisted Peer Review#625476
Record · ID 972394
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive