Sentence Specificity Scores for Collaborative Technical Documentation: A Domain-Transfer Study

Counts differ because each database indexes a different set of publications. We treat OpenAlex as the canonical count; Google Scholar is not shown (no API, and crawling it violates its ToS).

Collaboration depends on shared context, and technical documentation is one way that context persists across people and AI teammates. Specificity, the amount and exactness of detail expressed in language, shapes what information documentation captures and how precisely that information is communicated. This work audits sentence-specificity scoring artifacts on technical documentation and tests whether scores applied only after generation help choose among fixed LLM-generated revisions. Across Wikipedia and three technical-documentation corpora, the fixed general-domain predictor SpeciTeller and the pinned post-publication author-repository implementation of Ko et al.'s target-adapted predictor produce different corpus orders and same-sentence rank agreement from -0.066 to 0.510. Strict filtering and token-length adjustment change these patterns without reconciling them. In the Gemma set, SpeciTeller ranking raises direction-valid selection from 71.7% to 83.3% (+11.7 points; 95% source-case bootstrap interval +1.7 to +21.7); in the GPT-OSS-120B set, SpeciTeller ranking raises direction-valid selection from 51.7% to 56.7% (+5.0 points; 95% source-case bootstrap interval -6.7 to +16.7), and every primary single-score GPT-OSS-120B interval includes zero. These findings tie score interpretation and decision value to the predictor and candidate set.