The Deontic Gap: Large Language Models and the Modal Language of Obligation

arXiv:2608.181442026-08-20

AI写的文字很少像人类那样说'你应该'或'你必须'

研究团队在多个大型文本语料库中,比较了AI生成文本和人类写作中must、should、have to等表示义务的词汇使用频率。结果显示,AI文本中这类'积极义务情态词'的使用率始终低于人类,尤其是should、have to、had to、can't这类个人化、口语化的表达差距最大。相反,AI在need to、must等更正式、程序化的表达上与人类相当甚至更多使用,而且AI文本整体的义务词密度更接近老式正式出版书籍的英语,而不是当代人类的日常写作风格。

论文原文摘要（英文）

Modal auxiliaries such as must, should, and have to mark necessity and obligation within the contexts of speaker authority and interpersonal stance. We examine whether large language models (LLMs) reproduce contemporary human patterns of deontic modal usage. Across three primary corpora, an external benchmark, two controlled replications, and a naturalistic eleven-model replication, AI-generated text consistently underuses positive deontic modals (must, should, have to, had to) relative to contemporary humans. Historical comparison with the Google Books Ngram corpus (1920-2022), used as a heuristic calibration against the published-prose record, shows that AI modal frequencies fall within the range of formal published English, whereas contemporary human modal rates in informal digital contexts often exceed twentieth-century book baselines. Phrase-level decomposition shows that the AI-human modal gap is concentrated in constructions central to interpersonal stance (should, have to, had to), while AI matches or exceeds humans on need to in instructional and question-answering contexts but not in persuasive student writing, indicating that the modal profile is genre-conditional. The findings suggest that LLM modal usage reflects the formal written resources on which these models were trained, while underusing the modal constructions through which contemporary human writers mark immediate, interpersonal obligation.

作者 · Daniel Hart, Sarah Allred, Joseph Abbas, Morenike Alugo