# Does GenAI Rewrite How We Write? An Empirical Study on Two-Million Preprints

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.17882 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.17882/

## Key facts

- Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 20 of its 43 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 18 Oct 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 20 of 20)

- [Attention Is All You Need](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.03762/) (2017)
- [Language Models are Few-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.14165/) (2020)
- [GPT-4 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.08774/) (2023)
- [Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.02155/) (2022)
- [LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.13971/) (2023)
- [On the Opportunities and Risks of Foundation Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.07258/) (2021)
- [Transformer in Transformer](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.00112/) (2021)
- [Agent Laboratory: Using LLM Agents as Research Assistants](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.04227/) (2025)
- [Structured Chain-of-Thought Prompting for Code Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.06599/) (2023)
- [Align Your Prompts: Test-Time Prompting with Distribution Alignment for Zero-Shot Generalization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.01459/) (2023)
- [Self-Play Fine-Tuning of Diffusion Models for Text-to-Image Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.10210/) (2024)
- [Synthetic Prompting: Generating Chain-of-Thought Demonstrations for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.00618/) (2023)
- [LoFiT: Localized Fine-tuning on LLM Representations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.01563/) (2024)
- [Autonomous LLM-driven research from data to human-verifiable research papers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.17605/) (2024)
- [A Simple Zero-shot Prompt Weighting Technique to Improve Prompt Ensembling in Text-Image Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.06235/) (2023)
- [Instance-adaptive Zero-shot Chain-of-Thought Prompting](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.20441/) (2024)
- [What Should We Engineer in Prompts? Training Humans in Requirement-Driven LLM Use](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.08775/) (2024)
- [Visual Prompting for Generalized Few-shot Segmentation: A Multi-scale Approach](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.11732/) (2024)
- [Towards Transparent and Incentive-Compatible Collaboration in Decentralized LLM Multi-Agent Systems: A Blockchain-Driven Approach](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.16736/) (2025)
- [S2FT: Efficient, Scalable and Generalizable LLM Fine-tuning by Structured Sparsity](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.06289/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [Most biomedical publications show signs of LLM-assisted writing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.10715/) (2026)
- [The Emerging AI Paper-Review Arms Race: Adversarial Co-Evolution in Scholarly Publishing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.07713/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Preprint repositories become central infrastructures for scholarly communication. Their expansion transforms how research is circulated and evaluated before journal publication. Generative large language models (LLMs) introduce a further potential disruption by altering how manuscripts are written. While speculation abounds, systematic evidence of whether and how LLMs reshape scientific publishing remains limited. This paper addresses the gap through a large-scale analysis of more than 2.1 million preprints spanning 2016--2025 (115 months) across four major repositories (i.e., arXiv, bioRxiv, medRxiv, SocArXiv). We introduce a multi-level analytical framework that integrates interrupted time-series models, collaboration and productivity metrics, linguistic profiling, and topic modeling to assess changes in volume, authorship, style, and disciplinary orientation. Our findings reveal that LLMs have accelerated submission and revision cycles, modestly increased linguistic complexity, and disproportionately expanded AI-related topics, while computationally intensive fields benefit more than others. These results show that LLMs act less as universal disruptors than as selective catalysts, amplifying existing strengths and widening disciplinary divides. By documenting these dynamics, the paper provides the first empirical foundation for evaluating the influence of generative AI on academic publishing and highlights the need for governance frameworks that preserve trust, fairness, and accountability in an AI-enabled research ecosystem.