mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

The Statistical Signature of LLMs

arXiv 2602.18152 ↗First posted 20 Feb 2026cs.CL cs.CY physics.soc-phcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models generate text through probabilistic sampling from high-dimensional distributions, yet how this process reshapes the structural statistical organization of language remains incompletely characterized. Here we show that lossless compression provides a simple, model-agnostic measure of statistical regularity that differentiates generative regimes directly from surface text. We analyze compression behavior across three progressively more complex information ecosystems: controlled human-LLM continuations, generative mediation of a knowledge infrastructure (Wikipedia vs. Grokipedia), and fully synthetic social interaction environments (Moltbook vs. Reddit). Across settings, compression reveals a persistent structural signature of probabilistic generation. In controlled and mediated contexts, LLM-produced language exhibits higher structural regularity and compressibility than human-written text, consistent with a concentration of output within highly recurrent statistical patterns. However, this signature shows scale dependence: in fragmented interaction environments the separation attenuates, suggesting a fundamental limit to surface-level distinguishability at small scales. This compressibility-based separation emerges consistently across models, tasks, and domains and can be observed directly from surface text without relying on model internals or semantic evaluation. Overall, our findings introduce a simple and robust framework for quantifying how generative systems reshape textual production, offering a structural perspective on the evolving complexity of communication.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 21 of its 42 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Feb 2026.

Builds on

21 of 42 references.

References · 21

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 59,932
  2. 2019The Curious Case of Neural Text Degenerationcited by 2,881
  3. 2023DetectGPT: Zero-Shot Machine-Generated Text Detection using Probability Curvaturecited by 705
  4. 2023A Watermark for Large Language Modelscited by 667
  5. 2019GLTR: Statistical Detection and Visualization of Generated Textcited by 490
  6. 2023How Close is ChatGPT to Human Experts? Comparison Corpus, Evaluation, and Detectioncited by 472
  7. 2020The Pushshift Reddit Datasetcited by 289
  8. 2023Fast-DetectGPT: Efficient Zero-Shot Detection of Machine-Generated Text via Conditional Probability Curvaturecited by 278
  9. 2024Spotting LLMs With Binoculars: Zero-Shot Detection of Machine-Generated Textcited by 255
  10. 2023A Survey on LLM-Generated Text Detection: Necessity, Methods, and Future Directionscited by 101
  11. 2023Testing of Detection Tools for AI-Generated Textcited by 86
  12. 2022Machine Generated Text: A Comprehensive Survey of Threat Models and Detection Methodscited by 75
9 more
  1. 2022Real or Fake Text?: Investigating Human Ability to Detect Boundaries Between Human-Written and Machine-Generated Textcited by 63
  2. 2024Do LLMs write like humans? Variation in grammatical and rhetorical stylescited by 62
  3. 2023HC3 Plus: A Semantic-Invariant Human ChatGPT Comparison Corpuscited by 33
  4. 2025The simulation of judgment in LLMscited by 22
  5. 2024GenAI Detection Tools, Adversarial Techniques and Implications for Inclusivity in Higher Educationcited by 13
  6. 2025Epistemological Fault Lines Between Human and Artificial Intelligencecited by 11
  7. 2025Generative Exaggeration in LLM Social Agents: Consistency, Bias, and Toxicitycited by 8
  8. 2025What did Elon change? A comprehensive analysis of Grokipediacited by 4
  9. 2026Wikipedia and Grokipedia: A Comparison of Human and Generative Encyclopediascited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.