Does Structured Intent Representation Generalize? A Cross-Language, Cross-Model Empirical Study of 5W3H Prompting
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Does structured intent representation generalize across languages and models? We study PPS (Prompt Protocol Specification), a 5W3H-based framework for structured intent representation in human-AI interaction, and extend prior Chinese-only evidence along three dimensions: two additional languages (English and Japanese), a fourth condition in which a user's simple prompt is automatically expanded into a full 5W3H specification by an AI-assisted authoring interface, and a new research question on cross-model output consistency. Across 2,160 model outputs (3 languages x 4 conditions x 3 LLMs x 60 tasks), we find that AI-expanded 5W3H prompts (Condition D) show no statistically significant difference in goal alignment from manually crafted 5W3H prompts (Condition C) across all three languages, while requiring only a single-sentence input from the user. Structured PPS conditions often reduce or reshape cross-model output variance, though this effect is not uniform across languages and metrics; the strongest evidence comes from identifying spurious low variance in unconstrained baselines. We also show that unstructured prompts exhibit a systematic dual-inflation bias: artificially high composite scores and artificially low apparent cross-model variance. These findings suggest that structured 5W3H representations can improve intent alignment and accessibility across languages and models, especially when AI-assisted authoring lowers the barrier for non-expert users.
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 11 of its 12 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 Mar 2026.
Builds on
11 of 12 references.
References · 11
- 2023Tree of Thoughts: Deliberate Problem Solving with Large Language Modelscited by 3,211
- 2021Pre-train, Prompt, and Predict: A Systematic Survey of Prompting Methods in Natural Language Processingcited by 2,234
- 2023FActScore: Fine-grained Atomic Evaluation of Factual Precision in Long Form Text Generationcited by 1,282
- 2021Prompt Programming for Large Language Models: Beyond the Few-Shot Paradigmcited by 606
- 2024A Systematic Survey of Prompt Engineering in Large Language Models: Techniques and Applicationscited by 431
- 2023Role-Play with Large Language Modelscited by 294
- 2022PromptSource: An Integrated Development Environment and Repository for Natural Language Promptscited by 289
- 2021Reframing Instructional Prompts to GPTk's Languagecited by 176
- 2023AI Transparency in the Age of LLMs: A Human-Centered Research Roadmapcited by 123
- 2023ChainForge: A Visual Toolkit for Prompt Engineering and LLM Hypothesis Testingcited by 88
- 2026Evaluating 5W3H Structured Prompting for Intent Alignment in Human-AI Interactioncited by 4
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.
3 papers.
- 2026Structured Intent as a Protocol-Like Communication Layer: Cross-Model Robustness, Framework Comparison, and the Weak-Model Compensation Effectcited by 2
- 2026Dimension-Level Intent Fidelity Evaluation for Large Language Models: Evidence from Structured Prompt Ablationcited by 1
- 2026Intent Signal Theory: A Computational Framework for Intent-State Control in Human-AI Interactioncited by 0
- 2026Intent Signal Theory: A Computational Framework for Intent-State Control in Human-AI Interaction24 May 2026
- 2026Dimension-Level Intent Fidelity Evaluation for Large Language Models: Evidence from Structured Prompt Ablation14 May 2026
- 2026Structured Intent as a Protocol-Like Communication Layer: Cross-Model Robustness, Framework Comparison, and the Weak-Model Compensation Effect31 Mar 2026