A survey-plus-benchmark argues that current code LLMs fail safety thresholds and need stronger governance, but the supporting experiment is incomplete.
An Empirical Study on Automatically Detecting AI-Generated Source Code: How Far Are We?
1 Pith paper cite this work. Polarity classification is still indexing.
abstract
Artificial Intelligence (AI) techniques, especially Large Language Models (LLMs), have started gaining popularity among researchers and software developers for generating source code. However, LLMs have been shown to generate code with quality issues and also incurred copyright/licensing infringements. Therefore, detecting whether a piece of source code is written by humans or AI has become necessary. This study first presents an empirical analysis to investigate the effectiveness of the existing AI detection tools in detecting AI-generated code. The results show that they all perform poorly and lack sufficient generalizability to be practically deployed. Then, to improve the performance of AI-generated code detection, we propose a range of approaches, including fine-tuning the LLMs and machine learning-based classification with static code metrics or code embedding generated from Abstract Syntax Tree (AST). Our best model outperforms state-of-the-art AI-generated code detector (GPTSniffer) and achieves an F1 score of 82.55. We also conduct an ablation study on our best-performing model to investigate the impact of different source code features on its performance.
citation-role summary
citation-polarity summary
fields
cs.SE 1years
2025 1verdicts
REJECT 1roles
background 1polarities
unclear 1representative citing papers
citing papers explorer
-
Rethinking Autonomy: Preventing Failures in AI-Driven Software Engineering
A survey-plus-benchmark argues that current code LLMs fail safety thresholds and need stronger governance, but the supporting experiment is incomplete.