Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Are You Human? An Adversarial Benchmark to Expose LLMs

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 2410.09569 v2 pith:QYLJKDKI submitted 2024-10-12 cs.CL cs.AI

classification cs.CLcs.AI
keywords challengesllmshumansabilitybenchmarkexplicitexposehuman
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated an alarming ability to impersonate humans in conversation, raising concerns about their potential misuse in scams and deception. Humans have a right to know if they are conversing to an LLM. We evaluate text-based prompts designed as challenges to expose LLM imposters in real-time. To this end we compile and release an open-source benchmark dataset that includes 'implicit challenges' that exploit an LLM's instruction-following mechanism to cause role deviation, and 'exlicit challenges' that test an LLM's ability to perform simple tasks typically easy for humans but difficult for LLMs. Our evaluation of 9 leading models from the LMSYS leaderboard revealed that explicit challenges successfully detected LLMs in 78.4% of cases, while implicit challenges were effective in 22.9% of instances. User studies validate the real-world applicability of our methods, with humans outperforming LLMs on explicit challenges (78% vs 22% success rate). Our framework unexpectedly revealed that many study participants were using LLMs to complete tasks, demonstrating its effectiveness in detecting both AI impostors and human misuse of AI tools. This work addresses the critical need for reliable, real-time LLM detection methods in high-stakes conversations.

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. Exploring Jailbreak Attacks on LLMs through Intent Concealment and Diversion

    cs.CR 2025-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    ICE decomposes a harmful prompt into hierarchy fragments and semantic hints, wraps them in a fake reasoning task, and reports state-of-the-art single-query jailbreak success, plus a new dual-scenario dataset.

Pith tools