ChatGPT as speechwriter for the French presidents
Open accessAbstract
Generative AI proposes several large language models (LLMs) to automatically generate a message in response to users' requests. Such scientific breakthroughs promote new writing assistants but with some fears. The main focus of this study is to analyze the written style of one LLM called ChatGPT by comparing its generated messages with those of the recent French presidents. To achieve this, we compare end-of-the-year addresses written by Chirac, Sarkozy, Hollande, and Macron with those automatically produced by ChatGPT. We found that ChatGPT tends to overuse nouns, possessive determiners, and numbers. On the other hand, the generated speeches employ less verbs, pronouns, and adverbs and include, in mean, too standardized sentences. Considering some words, one can observe that ChatGPT tends to overuse "to must" (devoir), "to continue" or the lemma "we" (nous). Moreover, GPT underuses the auxiliary verb "to be" (^etre), or the modal verbs "to will" (vouloir) or "to have to" (falloir). In addition, when a short text is provided as example to ChatGPT, the machine can generate a short message with a style closed to the original wording. Finally, we reveal that ChatGPT style exposes distinct features compared to real presidential speeches.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Labbé et al. (2024) observed an overuse of certain verbs, most notably the change-of-state verb continuer ('to continue'), in GPT-generated speeches compared to those delivered by French presidents.
“Labb ´ e et al. (2024) observed an overuse of certain verbs, most notably the change-of-state verb continuer ('to continue ' ) in GPT-generated speeches compared to those delivered by French presidents.”
From ChatGPT for President! Presupposed content in politicians versus GPT-generated texts (2025) · cites this paper as Labbé et al. (2024)
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 21
- Antoun, W., Mouilleron, V., Sagot, B., and Seddah, D. (2023). Towards a robust detection of language model-generated text: Is ChatGPT that easy to detect? CORIA-TALN Conference, Paris June 2023, 1-14.
- Bartélémy, J.P., and Guénoche, A. (1991). Trees and Proximity Representations. New York: John Wiley
- Bubeck, S., Chandrasekaran, V., Eldan, R., Gehrke, J., Horvitz, E., Kamar, E., Lee, P., Lee, Y.T., Lundberg, S., Nori, H., Palangi, H., Ribeiro, M.T., and Zhang, Y. (2023). Sparks of artificial general intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4. arXiv:2303.12712v5. · arXiv
- Byrne, J.A. and Labbé, C. (2017). Striking similarities between publications from China describ- ing single gene knockdown experiments in human cancer cell lines. Scientometrics, 110(3):1471-1493.
- Cabanac, G., Labbé, C., and Magazinov, A. (2021). Tortured phrases: A dubious writing style emerging in science. Evidence of critical issues affecting established journals. 2021. https://arxiv.org/abs/2107.06751 · arXiv
- T. M. & Hart P. E. (1967). Nearest neighbor pattern classification. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory. 13(1):21-27.
- Goodfellow, I., Bengio, Y., and Courville, A. (2016). Deep Learning. Boston: The MIT Press.
- Gao, C.A., Howard, F.M., Markov, N.S., Dyer, E.C., Rameh, S., Luo, Y., and Pearson, A.T. (2023). Comparing scientific abstracts generated by ChatGPT to real abstracts with detectors and blinded human reviewers. Digital Medicine, 75:1-5.
- Guo, B., Zhang, X., Wang, Z., Jiang, M., Nie, J., Ding, Y., Yue, J., and Wu, Y. (2023). How close is ChatGPT to human experts? Comparison corpus, evaluation and detection. arXiv:2301.07597. · arXiv
- Labbé, C. & Labbé, D. (2006). A tool for literary studies. Literary & Linguistic Computing, 21(3):311-326.
- Labbé, D. (2007). Experiments on authorship attribution by intertextual distance in English. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics, 14(1), 33-80.
- Labbé, C. and Labbé, D. (2013). Duplicate and fake publications in the scientific literature: how many SCIgen papers in computer science? Scientometrics, 94(1):379-396.
- Liu, Z., Lin, Y., and Sun, M. (2023). Representation Learning for Natural Language Processing. Singapore: Springer Verlag.
- Monière, D., Labbé, C. & Labbé, D. (2008). Les styles discursifs des premiers ministres québé- cois de Jean Lesage à Jean Charest. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 41(1):43-69
- Picazo-Sanchez, P., and Ortiz-Martin, L. (2024). Analysing the impact of ChatGPT in research. Applied Intelligence, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-024-05298-0. · DOI · Paper page
- Soto, R., Koch, K., Khan, A., Chen, B., Bishop, M., and Andrews, N. (2024). Few-shot detection on machine-generated text using style representations. arXiv: 2401.06712v1. https://arxiv.org/abs/2401.06712 · arXiv
- Savoy, J. (2018). Is Starnone really the author behind Ferrante? Digital Scholarship in the Humanities, 2018, 33(4), 902-918
- Savoy, J. (2020). Machine Learning Methods for Stylometry. Authorship Attribution and Author Profiling. Cham: Springer.
- Van Noorden, R. (2014). Publishers withdraw more than 120 gibberish papers, Nature, 24 Feb- ruary 2014. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature.2014.14763. · DOI
- Vaswani, A., Shazeer, N., Parmar, N., Uszkoreit, J., Jones, L., Gomez, A.N., Kaiser, L., and Polosukhin, I. (2017). Attention is all you need. In Advances in Neural Information Pro- cessing Systems, 30.
- Zhao, W., Zhou, K., Li, J., Tang, T., Wang, X, Hou, Y. Min, Y., Zhang, B., Zhang, J., Dong, Z., Du, Y., Yang, C., Chen, Y., Chen, Z., Jiang, J., Ren, R., Li, Y., Tang, X., Peiyu, P., Nie, J.Y., and Wen, J.R. (2023). A survey of large language models. arXiv: 2303.18223v11. · arXiv
Cited by
Sorted by citations
ChatGPT for President! Presupposed content in politicians versus GPT-generated texts
Garassino, D., Brocca, N., & Masia, V. (2025) · Applied Corpus Linguistics · doi:10.1016/j.acorp.2025.100156 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
- Authors
- Labbé, D., Labbé, C., & Savoy, J.
- Affiliations
- Sciences Po Grenoble (FR)
- Laboratoire d'Informatique de Grenoble (FR)
- University of Neuchâtel (CH)
- Corresponding author
- Savoy, Jacques
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2024
- Volume
- 40
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 549-561
- ISSN
- 2055-7671 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2411.18382
- OpenAlex
- W4409786997
- Cited by
- 3
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 1
- FWCI
- 1.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Digital Scholarship in the Humanities (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Authorship Attribution and Profiling
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Linguistic research and analysis
- Keywords
- ChatGPT, large language models, presidential speeches, French presidents, speech writing, writing style, stylistic analysis, political rhetoric, Jacques Chirac, Nicolas Sarkozy, François Hollande, Macron, generative AI
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
