Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Who Said That? Benchmarking Social Media AI Detection

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

arxiv 2310.08240 v1 pith:6JZB5PRF submitted 2023-10-12 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords detectionai-generatedmediasocialtextplatformsaccuracyai-text
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

AI-generated text has proliferated across various online platforms, offering both transformative prospects and posing significant risks related to misinformation and manipulation. Addressing these challenges, this paper introduces SAID (Social media AI Detection), a novel benchmark developed to assess AI-text detection models' capabilities in real social media platforms. It incorporates real AI-generate text from popular social media platforms like Zhihu and Quora. Unlike existing benchmarks, SAID deals with content that reflects the sophisticated strategies employed by real AI users on the Internet which may evade detection or gain visibility, providing a more realistic and challenging evaluation landscape. A notable finding of our study, based on the Zhihu dataset, reveals that annotators can distinguish between AI-generated and human-generated texts with an average accuracy rate of 96.5%. This finding necessitates a re-evaluation of human capability in recognizing AI-generated text in today's widely AI-influenced environment. Furthermore, we present a new user-oriented AI-text detection challenge focusing on the practicality and effectiveness of identifying AI-generated text based on user information and multiple responses. The experimental results demonstrate that conducting detection tasks on actual social media platforms proves to be more challenging compared to traditional simulated AI-text detection, resulting in a decreased accuracy. On the other hand, user-oriented AI-generated text detection significantly improve the accuracy of detection.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. When Detection Fails: The Power of Fine-Tuned Models to Generate Human-Like Social Media Text

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Fine-tuned LLMs generate social media text that evades state-of-the-art detectors and human readers, dropping detection accuracy from up to 99.9% to near chance.

Pith tools