/p/2026-10-07 · explainer
Paper explainer · 2610.04210 · Panthi, Yeamin and Abdelfattah

The note got welded into the text.

A model receives one flat string. When your product pastes a user’s text into a prompt and the user types a note underneath it, nothing in that string says where one stopped and the other began — and the note comes back inside the edit. This benchmark holds the instruction, the pasted text and the comment fixed and varies only how the seam between them is expressed: across 20 models, absorption at a bare newline runs from 7.7% to 66.7%, a blank line helps in none of them, explicit markers help in 19 of 20, and one added sentence about what the markers mean takes ten models to zero. It gets worse when the note looks like it belongs: the strongest model tested absorbed none of 100 casual notes and 81 of 100 code comments.

01 · The problem

A prompt is one flat string, and your paste has no edges in it

model
how the seam is expressed
what the model receives — one user message
what comes back

where the 300 examples come from
02 · The measurement

A blank line does nothing. Markers do a lot.

tap a layout

03 · The mechanism

The more the note looks like the text, the more it gets eaten

04 · The fix, measured

Every model improves when the paste has edges

tap a model

05 · In your own product

Corrupted edits a day at your paste volume illustrative

model
the layout your prompt template uses

Results

What the paper actually measured

What it does not show

In practice