字号·· | 护眼
techcrunch

Opus 5.5喜欢告诉你“这很重要”(以及其他AI写作的明显特征)Opus 5.5 loves to tell you ‘this matters’ (and other AI writing tells)

点「原文对照」整页切到原文,或双击某段只看那段的原文。

既然大模型生成的散文随处可见,人类便急切地想要寻找辨别它们的方法。虽然破折号和“深入研究”(delve)等早期特征早已消失,但研究人员表示,人工智能模型在撰写散文时仍然会暴露出许多惯用的破绽。

Now that LLM-generated prose is everywhere, human beings are eager for ways to sniff it out. While early tells like em-dashes and “delve” are long gone, researchers say there are still plenty of telltale habits that AI models fall back on when writing prose.

营销公司 Graphite 的一项最新研究考察了前沿模型的写作习惯,找出了每个模型最喜欢的词汇和短语。虽然破折号等旧破绽已被消除,但模型仍然倾向于使用对比强烈的句式,并且每个版本的模型都表现出自己独特的怪癖。最令人意外的是,这些破绽的范围竟然如此广泛。Graphite 发现了 13,000 个短语,它们在人工智能内容中的出现频率至少是人类内容的两倍——这就是他们对“破绽”的定义。

A new study from the marketing firm Graphite looked at the writing habits of frontier models, sussing out each model’s favorite words and phrases. While old tells like em-dash use have been stamped out, models still fall back on contrast-heavy constructions, with each model version showing its own unique quirks. The biggest surprise is how broad the scope of tells turns out to be. Graphite found 13,000 phrases that were at least twice as common in the AI content as human content — their definition of a “tell.”

Graphite 的首席人工智能官格雷格·德鲁克(Greg Druck)对 TechCrunch 表示:“结果表明,随着时间的推移,Claude 模型实际上越来越接近人类的词语分布。而 GPT 模型则越来越远。”大规模研究人工智能生成的文本需要仔细的研究设计。Graphite 首先收集了 ChatGPT 发布前发表的 10,000 篇文章构成的语料库,作为人类生成的对照组。

“It turns out that Claude models are actually getting closer to the human word distribution over time,” Graphite’s chief AI officer Greg Druck told TechCrunch. “And for the GPT models, it’s getting further away.”Studying AI-generated writing at scale required a careful study design. Graphite started with a corpus of 10,000 articles published before the release of ChatGPT, serving as the human-generated control group.

然后,研究人员让不同的人工智能模型根据摘要重写这些文章,以期尽可能消除来源偏差。通过拥有来自人类和每个模型的匹配样本,他们可以比较某些词汇和短语在人工智能写作中出现的频率,以及句式结构中的更广泛模式。

Then researchers had different AI models rewrite the articles from summaries, hoping to eliminate as much source bias as possible. With matching samples from both humans and each model, they could compare how often certain words and phrases appeared in AI writing, as well as broader patterns in sentence construction.

根据 Graphite 的结果,Claude Opus 5.5 最明显的破绽是“可靠的”(dependable)这个词,它出现的频率比人类样本高出 23 倍。虽然 Opus 5.5 现在避免使用“不是X,而是Y”的句式结构,但它仍然倾向于说某事“不仅仅是一个X,更是一个Y”。最重要的是,Opus 喜欢告诉你为什么事情很重要,它使用“这很重要”(this matters)这个短语的频率比人类写作高出 116 倍,而“为什么X很重要”(why X matters)出现的频率则高出 92 倍。

According to Graphite’s results, Claude Opus 5.5’s biggest tell is the word “dependable,” which pops up 23 times more often than in human samples. While Opus 5.5 now avoids the “it’s not X, it’s Y” sentence construction, it still tends to say something “is more than an X, it’s a Y.” Above all, Opus loves to tell you why things matter, using the phrase “this matters” 116 times more often than human writing, while “why X matters” occurs 92 times more often.

OpenAI的Astra模型在语言表达上有一些独特的特征:它喜欢描述其所讨论对象的“另一个维度”,并且在表述某些观点时往往会使用模糊的语言(例如,称某个行为“可能”或“能够”带来某种好处)。其最明显的特征是Graphite研究所指出的“修正性表达方式”——即模型倾向于将某个概念定义为“不仅仅是X”,或者提供另一种替代方案,而不是直接依赖X。根据Graphite的研究,这种表达方式在Astra生成的文本中出现的频率是人工写作中的100多倍。

OpenAI’s Astra has a different set of tip-offs. This model loves to describe “another dimension” of whatever it’s talking about, and tends to hedge claims by saying an action “may provide” or “can provide” a particular benefit. Its biggest tell is what Graphite calls the “corrective framing,” where a topic is defined as “not simply X” or offered as an alternative, “rather than relying on X.” According to graphite’s research, those constructions were more than 100 times more common in Astra-generated prose than in human writing.

值得注意的是,所有前沿的AI研究实验室似乎都注意到了这些模型在语言表达上的问题。在Graphite提供的样本中,Opus 5.5模型使用破折号的频率比Opus 5模型低了99%;而Astra模型使用破折号的频率比人类写作样本低了88%;Gemini 3.1 Pro模型则几乎完全摒弃了破折号这一标点符号。

Notably, all the frontier labs seem to have responded to the idea that models overuse em-dashes. In Graphite’s samples, Opus 5.5 used the punctuation mark 99% less often than Opus 5. Astra now uses it 88 percent less than human samples, whereas Gemini 3.1 Pro has almost completely eliminated the em-dash from its writing.

尽管某些特定的语言表达特征在逐渐减少,但整体而言这些特征的数量基本保持稳定。Druck告诉TechCrunch:“这些特征并没有真正消失;研究人员虽然成功消除了那些最明显的表达方式,但新的特征仍在不断出现,而且每个模型版本都有自己独特的表达习惯。”

But while individual tells change, Graphite says the overall number is mostly holding steady. “It’s not like the tells are decreasing,” Druck told TechCrunch. “They are managing to remove the most well-known tells, but other ones pop up. And every model version has its own.”

令人惊讶的是,尽管这些特征如此明显,但AI研究实验室似乎仍然难以完全消除它们。在Opus 5.5模型的发布会上,Anthropic公司声称该模型的表达方式比之前的模型更加自然,早期用户认为其写作更加清晰、易于理解。OpenAI在发布GPT-6的Sol和Luna模型时也做出了类似的宣传,称用户会看到更清晰的表达、更少的专业术语以及更合理的句子结构。

It’s surprising that tells are so persistent, given the labs’ focus on human-like writing styles. In the Opus 5.5 release, Anthropic boasted that the model “communicates more naturally than prior models,” saying early users “found its writing clearer and easier to follow.”OpenAI made similar claims when releasing the GPT-6 versions of Sol and Luna, saying users could “expect to see more clarity, less jargon, [and] fewer odd turns of phrase.”

然而,Druck对实验室能否彻底消除这些特征表示怀疑:“我认为,这些研究实验室在控制模型语言表达方面做得并不如人们想象的那么好,”Druck说。“这些模型规模庞大(拥有数十亿个参数),它们能进行的测试数量有限,因此总有一些问题会‘漏网’。”

But Druck is skeptical about how much the labs can do to completely eliminate telltale construction or phrases. “A general hypothesis I have is that the labs are less able to control some of these things than you might expect,” Druck says. “These are giant models with billions of parameters. They have some finite number of tests they can run, and things slip through.”