REVIEW 18 cited by
DetectGPT: Zero-Shot Machine-Generated Text Detection using Probability Curvature
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
DetectGPT: Zero-Shot Machine-Generated Text Detection using Probability Curvature
read the original abstract
The increasing fluency and widespread usage of large language models (LLMs) highlight the desirability of corresponding tools aiding detection of LLM-generated text. In this paper, we identify a property of the structure of an LLM's probability function that is useful for such detection. Specifically, we demonstrate that text sampled from an LLM tends to occupy negative curvature regions of the model's log probability function. Leveraging this observation, we then define a new curvature-based criterion for judging if a passage is generated from a given LLM. This approach, which we call DetectGPT, does not require training a separate classifier, collecting a dataset of real or generated passages, or explicitly watermarking generated text. It uses only log probabilities computed by the model of interest and random perturbations of the passage from another generic pre-trained language model (e.g., T5). We find DetectGPT is more discriminative than existing zero-shot methods for model sample detection, notably improving detection of fake news articles generated by 20B parameter GPT-NeoX from 0.81 AUROC for the strongest zero-shot baseline to 0.95 AUROC for DetectGPT. See https://ericmitchell.ai/detectgpt for code, data, and other project information.
Forward citations
Cited by 18 Pith papers
-
SV-Detect: AI-generated Text Detection with Steering Vectors
Steering vectors from frozen LM layers enable a lightweight classifier to detect machine-generated text robustly across domains, source models, and editing attacks.
-
ExaGPT: Example-Based Machine-Generated Text Detection for Human Interpretability
ExaGPT uses span-level similarity retrieval from human and LLM datastores to detect machine-generated text while supplying the matching spans as human-interpretable evidence, achieving up to 37-point accuracy gains ov...
-
Detecting Pretraining Data from Large Language Models
Min-K% Prob detects pretraining data in LLMs by flagging outlier low-probability words in text, achieving 7.4% better performance than prior methods on the new WIKIMIA benchmark.
-
Policies Permitting LLM Use for Polishing Peer Reviews Are Currently Not Enforceable
State-of-the-art AI detectors misclassify a non-trivial fraction of LLM-polished peer reviews as fully AI-generated, rendering polishing-only policies currently unenforceable.
-
Using Large Language Models for Idea Generation in Innovation
GPT-4-generated product ideas had higher average purchase intent than student ideas and made up 35 of the top 40 ideas, while being rated less novel and more similar to each other.
-
AI's Capability in Assisting Scientific Research in Physics, Astrophysics, and Cosmology I: Literature Review
In a controlled test, three mid-2025 LLMs shared under 6% of literature references with physics experts, and 64% of their real references had at least one metadata error.
-
Artificial Epanorthosis: Why large language models overuse a classical rhetorical figure, and how to mitigate it
LLMs overuse the 'not X, but Y' self-correction pattern in persuasive registers and underuse it in informal Q&A; a prompt or a detachable LoRA dial adjusts it to human levels.
-
Can AI-Generated Text be Reliably Detected?
Recursive paraphrasing attacks substantially lower detection rates for multiple AI text detectors with only minor quality loss, while a theoretical analysis ties best-case AUROC to total variation distance between hum...
-
AI's Capability in Assisting Scientific Research in Physics, Astrophysics, and Cosmology II: Project Planning and Proposal Evaluation
AI-generated one-page research proposals are scored about the same as human-written ones by human reviewers, but AI reviewers favor AI-written proposals by roughly one point and detect authorship perfectly.
-
The Assistant as a Privileged Persona: A canonical reference in cross-persona self-recognition
On Llama-3.1-70B-Instruct the Assistant persona functions as the sole canonical reference for cross-persona authorship judgments, with symmetric entropy gaps predicting only on its row and asymmetric surprise relative...
-
SCI-Defense: Defending Manipulation Attacks from Generative Engine Optimization
SCI-Defense combines perplexity detection, semantic integrity scoring across four manipulation dimensions, and inter-candidate detection to counter GEO attacks, reporting perfect precision on Amazon product data but d...
-
Please Make it Sound like Human: Encoder-Decoder vs. Decoder-Only Transformers for AI-to-Human Text Style Transfer
BART-large outperforms Mistral-7B in AI-to-human style transfer with higher reference similarity scores and far fewer parameters, while showing that marker shift can reflect overshoot rather than accurate transfer.
-
Probabilistic Modeling of Latent Agentic Substructures in Deep Neural Networks
Proposes a probabilistic framework for latent agentic substructures in DNNs using log-score utilities and log pooling, with proofs on unanimity and an application to persona emergence in LLM alignment.
-
A Practice Auditing Framework for Large Language Model Use: Collective Empiricism, Pseudo-Rational Cognition, and Governance of AI-Generated Content
This paper proposes a conceptual auditing framework for LLM interactions to mitigate risks from mistaking AI-generated content for empirical knowledge.
-
LLMSniffer: Detecting LLM-Generated Code via GraphCodeBERT and Supervised Contrastive Learning
LLMSniffer improves detection of LLM-generated code on GPTSniffer and Whodunit benchmarks by fine-tuning GraphCodeBERT via two-stage supervised contrastive learning plus preprocessing and MLP classification.
-
A Comprehensive Dataset for Human vs. AI Generated Text Detection
A dataset of ~58k NYT articles plus AI rewrites from six LLMs, evaluated with a rewrite-distance baseline reaching 58.35% detection and 8.92% attribution accuracy.
-
Findings of the Counter Turing Test: AI-Generated Text Detection
Shared task findings show F1=1.0000 for binary AI text detection and 0.9531 for model attribution using fine-tuned DeBERTa and BART transformers with ensembles.
-
Findings of the Counter Turing Test: AI-Generated Text Detection
Shared task findings show near-perfect binary detection of AI-generated text but greater difficulty in attributing outputs to particular language models.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.