Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

How You Prompt Matters! Even Task-Oriented Constraints in Instructions Affect LLM-Generated Text 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 2311.08369 v4 pith:DR4V6YEH submitted 2023-11-14 cs.CL

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

To combat the misuse of Large Language Models (LLMs), many recent studies have presented LLM-generated-text detectors with promising performance. When users instruct LLMs to generate texts, the instruction can include different constraints depending on the user's need. However, most recent studies do not cover such diverse instruction patterns when creating datasets for LLM detection. In this paper, we reveal that even task-oriented constraints -- constraints that would naturally be included in an instruction and are not related to detection-evasion -- cause existing powerful detectors to have a large variance in detection performance. We focus on student essay writing as a realistic domain and manually create task-oriented constraints based on several factors for essay quality. Our experiments show that the standard deviation (SD) of current detector performance on texts generated by an instruction with such a constraint is significantly larger (up to an SD of 14.4 F1-score) than that by generating texts multiple times or paraphrasing the instruction. We also observe an overall trend where the constraints can make LLM detection more challenging than without them. Finally, our analysis indicates that the high instruction-following ability of LLMs fosters the large impact of such constraints on detection performance.

Discussion (0). Sign in 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. HACo-Det: A Study Towards Fine-Grained Machine-Generated Text Detection under Human-AI Coauthoring

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Current machine-generated text detectors, especially metric-based ones, perform poorly on word-level detection in coauthored texts, while finetuned DeBERTa achieves strong but imperfect performance.

Pith tools