Inverse Turing Bench evaluates LLMs on distinguishing human-human from human-AI dialogues, with GPTZero at 89.41%, Claude Opus-4.6 at 77.92%, and GPT-5.5 at 75.94% accuracy.
Title resolution pending
2 Pith papers cite this work. Polarity classification is still indexing.
2
Pith papers citing it
fields
cs.CL 2years
2026 2verdicts
UNVERDICTED 2representative citing papers
A survey of LLMs for graph computation introduces a role-based taxonomy of executors versus planners and concludes that current models suit simple small-scale tasks but remain unreliable for large-scale exact computation.
citing papers explorer
-
Inverse Turing Bench: Evaluating Language Models as Judges of Human vs. AI Dialogue
Inverse Turing Bench evaluates LLMs on distinguishing human-human from human-AI dialogues, with GPTZero at 89.41%, Claude Opus-4.6 at 77.92%, and GPT-5.5 at 75.94% accuracy.
-
Are Large Language Models Suitable for Graph Computation? Progress and Prospects
A survey of LLMs for graph computation introduces a role-based taxonomy of executors versus planners and concludes that current models suit simple small-scale tasks but remain unreliable for large-scale exact computation.