The widespread use of large language models (LLMs) raises an important question: how do texts evolve when they are repeatedly processed by LLMs? In this paper, we define this iterative inference process as Markovian generation chains, where each step takes a specific prompt template and the previous output as input, without including any prior data. In iterative rephrasing and round-trip translation experiments, the output either converges to a small recurrent set or continues to produce novel sentences within a finite horizon. Through sentence-level Markov chain modeling and analysis of simulated data, we show that iterative process can either increase or reduce the diversity depending on factors such as the temperature parameter and the initial input sentence. These results offer valuable insights into the dynamics of iterative LLM inference and their implications for multi-agent LLM systems.

Coding remains one of the most fundamental modes of interaction between humans and machines. With the rapid advancement of Large Language Models (LLMs), code generation capabilities have begun to significantly reshape programming practices. This development prompts a central question: Have LLMs transformed code style, and how can such transformation be characterized? In this paper, we present a pioneering study that investigates the impact of LLMs on code style, with a focus on naming conventions, complexity, maintainability, and similarity. By analyzing code from over 20,000 GitHub repositories linked to arXiv papers published between 2020 and 2025, we identify measurable trends in the evolution of coding style that align with characteristics of LLM-generated code. For instance, the proportion of snake_case function names in Python code increased from 40.7% in Q1 2023 to 49.8% in Q3 2025. Furthermore, we investigate how LLMs approach algorithmic problems by examining their reasoning processes. Our experimental results may provide the first large-scale empirical evidence that LLMs affect real-world programming style.

Large language models are increasingly used to answer culturally grounded questions across languages, yet it remains unclear whether local cultural knowledge is better accessed through English or the local language. Existing evaluations face two key limitations: many rely on parallel template-based questions that may not reflect how cultural knowledge naturally appears, and raw accuracy conflates general language proficiency with language-conditioned knowledge access. We address these issues with a controlled framework built on real-world cultural questions collected from regional benchmarks and local sources. By crossing question type, culture-agnostic versus culture-specific, with query language, English versus local language, and estimating ability using a shared 1PL item response theory model, we separate proficiency from localized knowledge access. Across 13 locales and roughly 80 models, we find a consistent English advantage on culture-agnostic questions, indicating stronger English proficiency. However, after accounting for this proficiency gap, local languages show a positive knowledge-access advantage in nearly all locale–model settings. This advantage is often masked in raw accuracy but becomes more visible for frontier, regionally aligned, or language-adapted models. Our results suggest that weaker local-language performance does not necessarily imply weaker cultural knowledge; rather, local cultural knowledge may be more accessible through the local language but hidden by limited language proficiency.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly impacting human society, particularly in textual information. Based on more than 30,000 papers and 1,000 presentations from machine learning conferences, we examined and compared the words used in writing and speaking, representing the first large-scale study of how LLMs influence the two main modes of verbal communication and expression within the same group of people. Our empirical results show that LLM-style words such as significant have been used more frequently in abstracts and oral presentations. The implicit impact on human expression like writing and speaking is beginning to emerge and is likely to grow in the future. We take the first step in building an automated monitoring platform to record its longitudinal changes to call attention to the implicit influence and ripple effect of LLMs on human society.

With a statistical analysis of arXiv paper abstracts, we report a marked drop in the frequency of several words previously identified as overused by ChatGPT, such as “delve”, starting soon after they were pointed out in early 2024. The frequency of certain other words favored by ChatGPT, such as “significant”, has instead kept increasing. These phenomena suggest that some authors of academic papers have adapted their use of large language models (LLMs), for example, by selecting outputs or applying modifications to the LLM-generated content. Such coevolution and cooperation of humans and LLMs thus introduce additional challenges to the detection of machine-generated text in real-world scenarios. Estimating the impact of LLMs on academic writing by examining word frequency remains feasible, and more attention should be paid to words that were already frequently employed, including those that have decreased in frequency due to LLMs’ disfavor. The coevolution between humans and LLMs also merits further study.

As large language models are increasingly responsible for online content, concerns arise about the impact of repeatedly processing their own outputs.Inspired by the “broken telephone” effect in chained human communication, this study investigates whether LLMs similarly distort information through iterative generation.Through translation-based experiments, we find that distortion accumulates over time, influenced by language choice and chain complexity. While degradation is inevitable, it can be mitigated through strategic prompting techniques. These findings contribute to discussions on the long-term effects of AI-mediated information propagation, raising important questions about the reliability of LLM-generated content in iterative workflows.