Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Stumbling Blocks: Stress Testing the Robustness of Machine-Generated Text Detectors Under Attacks

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 2402.11638 v1 pith:JCIKCW5Q submitted 2024-02-18 cs.CL

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

The widespread use of large language models (LLMs) is increasing the demand for methods that detect machine-generated text to prevent misuse. The goal of our study is to stress test the detectors' robustness to malicious attacks under realistic scenarios. We comprehensively study the robustness of popular machine-generated text detectors under attacks from diverse categories: editing, paraphrasing, prompting, and co-generating. Our attacks assume limited access to the generator LLMs, and we compare the performance of detectors on different attacks under different budget levels. Our experiments reveal that almost none of the existing detectors remain robust under all the attacks, and all detectors exhibit different loopholes. Averaging all detectors, the performance drops by 35% across all attacks. Further, we investigate the reasons behind these defects and propose initial out-of-the-box patches to improve robustness.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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.

  2. Hijacking Text Heritage: Hiding the Human Signature through Homoglyphic Substitution

    cs.CR 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

    Replacing characters in at least 37.5% of words with visual homoglyphs degrades authorship verification scores enough to obfuscate style, with diminishing returns past 50%.

Pith tools