Sign inGet started
Paper · arXiv

Teaching LLMs Human-Like Editing of Inappropriate Argumentation via Reinforcement Learning

Editing human-written text has become a standard use case of large language models (LLMs), for example, to make one's arguments more appropriate for a discussion. Comparing human to LLM-generated edits, however, we observe a mismatch in editing strategies: While LLMs often perform multiple scattered edits and tend to change meaning notably, humans rather encapsulate dependent changes in self-contained, meaning-preserving edits. In this paper, we present a reinforcement learning approach that teaches LLMs human-like editing to improve the appropriateness of arguments. Our approach produces self-contained sentence-level edit suggestions that can be accepted or rejected independently. We tra...

AuthorsTimon Ziegenbein, Maja Stahl, Henning Wachsmuth
Primary categorycs.CL
Published14 April 2026
Last updated at source14 April 2026
cs.CL
Embed this entry
<iframe src="https://silytics.si/embed/item/f47b0bf6-2c6f-497a-8cd2-3a9a010d1f31" width="420" height="190" style="border:0" loading="lazy" title="Silytics entry"></iframe>

Free, no tracking. More about feeds and embeds.

Silytics shows public metadata from arXiv and links to the original. Information may be incomplete or out of date. Last refreshed 17 October 2026. Licenses and terms of the original apply to the work itself. Not financial, legal or professional advice.