pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.24287 · v1 · pith:UHCYYZXNnew · submitted 2026-05-22 · 💻 cs.SI

Humans Cannot Detect AI-Generated Media But Communities May -- For Now: Collaborative AI Detection in r/RealOrAI on Reddit

classification 💻 cs.SI
keywords communitydetectionmediaai-generatedcommunitiesfeaturesgroundguess
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

We study human AI-detection behaviour at scale using a year of activity from r/RealOrAI, a Reddit community where users collaboratively assess whether visual media is real or AI-generated. The community is moderated by a bot that solicits verified labels from submitters of self-challenging "[GUESS]" posts and publishes an aggregate community prediction for each post, yielding naturalistic ground truth at scale. Community detection accuracy reaches 72% on [GUESS] posts with a systematic false-positive bias that intensifies over the year as the community's AI-suspicion grows. Using a six-LLM ensemble validated against human-annotated ground truth, we classify 10k reasoning-bearing comments along six cues covering perceptual features, context, consistency, AI knowledge, subject-matter expertise and provenance (tracing the media to its source). Perceptual features (scene, visual artifacts, anatomy physics, lighting, behavior, text, audio) dominate reasoning (70%) while provenance verification is rarest (4%) at the individual level but is amplified 4.3x in community summaries, revealing aggregation as a reliability filter that selectively surfaces diagnostic evidence. These findings reveal the limits of heuristic-based detection and show how online communities collectively navigate an increasingly contested information environment.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.