Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 cited by

From Deception to Detection: The Dual Roles of Large Language Models in Fake News

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 2409.17416 v1 pith:SVUFO7PN submitted 2024-09-25 cs.CL cs.AI

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

Fake news poses a significant threat to the integrity of information ecosystems and public trust. The advent of Large Language Models (LLMs) holds considerable promise for transforming the battle against fake news. Generally, LLMs represent a double-edged sword in this struggle. One major concern is that LLMs can be readily used to craft and disseminate misleading information on a large scale. This raises the pressing questions: Can LLMs easily generate biased fake news? Do all LLMs have this capability? Conversely, LLMs offer valuable prospects for countering fake news, thanks to their extensive knowledge of the world and robust reasoning capabilities. This leads to other critical inquiries: Can we use LLMs to detect fake news, and do they outperform typical detection models? In this paper, we aim to address these pivotal questions by exploring the performance of various LLMs. Our objective is to explore the capability of various LLMs in effectively combating fake news, marking this as the first investigation to analyze seven such models. Our results reveal that while some models adhere strictly to safety protocols, refusing to generate biased or misleading content, other models can readily produce fake news across a spectrum of biases. Additionally, our results show that larger models generally exhibit superior detection abilities and that LLM-generated fake news are less likely to be detected than human-written ones. Finally, our findings demonstrate that users can benefit from LLM-generated explanations in identifying fake news.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 5 Pith papers

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

  1. Telescope: Improving Zero Shot Detection of LLM Generated Content By Measuring Token Repetition Probability

    cs.CL 2026-07 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

    Telescope Perplexity, the average negative log probability a reference LM assigns to each token immediately after seeing it, yields strong zero-shot LLM-text detection by probing an early-training aversion to repetition.

  2. ChartAttack: Testing the Vulnerability of LLMs to Malicious Prompting in Chart Generation

    cs.CL 2026-01 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Prompting code-capable multimodal LLMs with adversarial examples can generate misleading bar/line charts that reduce chart-QA accuracy by ~17 points for 19 models and ~20 points for a small human sample.

  3. Do people rely on ChatGPT more than their peers to detect deepfake news?

    econ.GN 2026-08 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    In a lab deepfake-detection task, students shifted more toward ChatGPT's advice than toward peers' advice (weight-of-advice 0.59 vs 0.33), though in 2025 sessions they trusted linguistic experts slightly more than ChatGPT.

  4. Large Language Models in Misinformation Ecosystems: Misuse, Defense, and Vulnerability

    cs.CR 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A role-layer survey unifies LLM misuse, LLM-based defense, and LLM-centric verification vulnerabilities across content, social, evidence, and workflow layers, then lists three open challenges.

  5. Leveraging Knowledge Graphs and LLMs for Structured Generation of Misinformation

    cs.AI 2025-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A knowledge graph-guided LLM pipeline generates misinformation by replacing objects in true triplets with structurally similar ones, and LLM judges often fail to flag the fakes as fake.

Pith tools