CORTEXA
← Browse
arxivcs.CLcs.AI2026-07-21

Prompt Design at Scale: How Format, Instruction Count, and Context Length Shape Instruction Adherence and Hallucination in Large Language Models

Netanel Eliav

Practitioners make three prompt-design decisions with almost no controlled evidence behind them: how to format instructions and context (markdown, plain text, prose, or tabular), how many simultaneous instructions a system prompt can carry before compliance degrades, and how much context a model can hold before recall and honesty degrade. We report two controlled experiments crossing all three factors on one held, contamination-free synthetic corpus (the "Book of Veyra," 8,780 uniquely-named entities, deterministically regenerable from a fixed seed), evaluated across five models. Experiment 1 (960 calls/model) measures instruction-following decay as rule count N grows from 10 to 160, crossed with four formats and system-prompt vs. user-turn placement. Perfect-response rate collapses to zero by N=80 for every model, format, and placement. Placement produces effects at least as large as format at N=160 in most models, but the direction is model-specific. No model shows a reliable markdown advantage; one 35B model favors plain text instead. Experiment 2 (5,520 calls/model) measures recall accuracy, false-premise sycophancy, and absent-fact fabrication across a 2k-to-512k-token context ladder in the same four formats. Recall stays near ceiling through 64-128k tokens, then degrades sharply and format-dependently: one model's accuracy spread reaches 48 points at 128k tokens. Fabrication never occurs (0/5,760 probes), and sycophancy stays negligible (<=8.3%). What rises sharply near each model's context ceiling is outright refusal to answer (0% to 79-90%), distinct from sycophancy or fabrication. Neither pre-registered format ordering holds, and token overhead (+22% to +37% over plain text) further changes which format is preferable where accuracy spread is genuine. We release the full harness, corpus generator, and raw results (VeyraBench): https://github.com/iNetanel/veyrabench

View free PDFSource page

Related papers

arxivcs.AIcs.CL2026-07-23

Agentic coding without the cloud: evaluating open-weight large language models on longitudinal data preparation tasks

Mack Nixon, Liam Wright, Yevgeniya Kovalchuk, Alison Fang-Wei Wu, Martin Danka, Andy Boyd, et al.

Large language models (LLMs) and agents are now widely used tools in code development, with data typically sent to third-party cloud-based models. Their adoption in research using personal data is constrained by governance requirements that typically prohibit data transmission to…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.CLcs.AI2026-07-24

From Isolated Tasks to Structured Capabilities: A Multilayer Taxonomy for Large Language Models

Shixin Fang, Jiachen Wo, Wenjuan Qin, Sihang Jiang, Yanghua Xiao

Large language model (LLM) evaluation spans diverse tasks and benchmarks, yet evidence remains organized around tasks rather than the capabilities they probe. This fragmentation limits cross-study comparison, obscures capabilities tasks recruit, and makes coverage gaps difficult…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.CLcs.AI2026-07-23

Artificial Epanorthosis: Why large language models overuse a classical rhetorical figure, and how to mitigate it

Federico Boggia

A rhetorical figure that Cicero and Quintilian catalogued two thousand years ago reappears, systematically, in the text of large language models: epanorthosis, the self-correction of the specimen «This is not a course. It is a journey of transformation». This essay argues that th…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.CLcs.AI2026-07-24

Why Large Language Models and Humans Converge and Diverge in Evaluating Creativity

Pengzhao Lyu, Yeun Joon Kim, Hanlin Xiao, Yingyue Luna Luan

Despite the growing use of large language models (LLMs) as creativity evaluators, evidence of their alignment with human evaluations remains mixed, raising the question of when and why their judgments converge with or diverge from human judgments. Across three studies and six wid…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.CLcs.AIcs.CVcs.HC2026-07-31

FriendBench: Benchmarking Dyadic Familiarity Inference in Humans and Multimodal Large Language Models

Jeffrey M. Girard, Jason Z. Zheng, Jacqueline R. Vertino, Antony D'Avirro, Benjamin Peloquin

Reading a social situation often depends on behavior, not words alone. We introduce FriendBench, a benchmark for inferring whether two people are already familiar or are meeting as strangers, from a 20-second clip of a dyadic ice-breaker conversation. Every pair answers the same…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.LGcs.AIcs.CL2026-07-23

Training Large Language Models for Self-Explanation Faithfulness

Yeoktatt Cheah, María Pérez-Ortiz, Noah Y. Siegel, Oana-Maria Camburu

We propose a Reinforcement Learning (RL) method to directly optimize the faithfulness of self-explanations - the extent to which a model's generated reasoning accurately reflects its internal decision-making process. While existing work focuses on evaluating faithfulness or using…

View free PDFSource page