Malvina Nissim | arXiv Science

arXiv2026

Language, Language Models, and What We're Talking About

Language models are commonly discussed as technical artefacts, but they are obviously shaped by the linguistic worlds conveyed by data during their training. Using Italian language models as evidence, I want to bring attention to the nature of the systems which result from training and specialising models on translated and synthetic data, and further curating them, and to the meaning of testing them on equally unnatural data. Are these eventually models of Italian? Are they models of language? Does NLP still care about language? These questions yield another, more concrete question: what language do we actually want language models to produce? I argue that this question cannot be answered if we do not first consider a clearer distinction between language models designed as technical products and language models designed as tools for studying language itself. The answers then might be diverse, the languages we are talking about might be diverse, and the picture might not be as pessimistic as we fear.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Stranger, Fan, or Peer? A Systematic Study on the Role of Interlocutor in Persona-Based Dialogue Generation

Persona-based dialogue systems are usually conditioned on speaker biography, but dialogues involve at least two participants, and who has access to whose biography can vary across training, inference, and evaluation. Prior work often neglected these aspects, obscuring mechanisms that only appear when biography visibility is toggled separately across training, inference, and evaluation, a three-stage factorisation that prior work has largely treated as a single factor. We study this factorisation on a dataset of dialogues paired with speaker's biographies, varying whether the target and interlocutor speakers see each other's biographies during training and inference, and using an LLM as a judge to perform author identification. We find that (i) training-time visibility, more than inference-time visibility, determines whether models express persona traits through dialogue or fall back on copying biographical text (a known problem/phenomenon in persona-based generation); (ii) models trained with interlocutor-biography visibility copy less target-biographical text than models trained without it, while changing visibility only at inference time has a less consistent effect; and (iii) under asymmetric disclosure, where only the interlocutor sees the target biography, target content leaks into interlocutor turns more often, and dialogues containing such traces are easier for the judge to identify, especially when interlocutor turns are visible. These results suggest that biography leakage into generated turns is an artefact of how interlocutor visibility is configured across training and inference, and separating the three stages is necessary.

cs.CL↗