Pith. sign in

REVIEW 8 cited by

On the Possibilities of AI-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 2304.04736 v3 pith:X3VHHN36 submitted 2023-04-10 cs.CL cs.AIcs.LG

On the Possibilities of AI-Generated Text Detection

classification cs.CL cs.AIcs.LG
keywords textdetectionacrossai-generateddetectorsempiricalincludingsample
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Our work addresses the critical issue of distinguishing text generated by Large Language Models (LLMs) from human-produced text, a task essential for numerous applications. Despite ongoing debate about the feasibility of such differentiation, we present evidence supporting its consistent achievability, except when human and machine text distributions are indistinguishable across their entire support. Drawing from information theory, we argue that as machine-generated text approximates human-like quality, the sample size needed for detection increases. We establish precise sample complexity bounds for detecting AI-generated text, laying groundwork for future research aimed at developing advanced, multi-sample detectors. Our empirical evaluations across multiple datasets (Xsum, Squad, IMDb, and Kaggle FakeNews) confirm the viability of enhanced detection methods. We test various state-of-the-art text generators, including GPT-2, GPT-3.5-Turbo, Llama, Llama-2-13B-Chat-HF, and Llama-2-70B-Chat-HF, against detectors, including oBERTa-Large/Base-Detector, GPTZero. Our findings align with OpenAI's empirical data related to sequence length, marking the first theoretical substantiation for these observations.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 8 Pith papers

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

  1. Base Models Look Human To AI Detectors

    cs.CL 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Base model text evades AI detectors better than instruction-tuned text, and the HIP method strengthens this trade-off across model sizes.

  2. AI-Associated Lexical Shifts Across 34 Languages: Cross-Lingual Convergence and Diachronic Uptake in News Writing

    cs.CL 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Analysis of news text in 34 languages shows cross-lingual convergence on AI-associated lemmas and increased prevalence of top AI-overused items after ChatGPT's release.

  3. GigaCheck: Detecting LLM-generated Content via Object-Centric Span Localization

    cs.CL 2024-10 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    GigaCheck detects LLM-generated text at both document and span levels by combining fine-tuned language-model embeddings with a DETR-like architecture that treats generated intervals as detectable objects.

  4. Scaling Synthetic Data Creation with 1,000,000,000 Personas

    cs.CL 2024-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    A curated set of one billion personas enables scalable, diverse synthetic data generation for LLM training across reasoning, instructions, knowledge, NPCs, and tools.

  5. Monitoring AI-Modified Content at Scale: A Case Study on the Impact of ChatGPT on AI Conference Peer Reviews

    cs.CL 2024-03 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    A maximum likelihood model estimates 6.5-16.9% of peer-review text at ICLR 2024, NeurIPS 2023, CoRL 2023 and EMNLP 2023 was substantially modified by LLMs, with elevated rates in low-confidence and deadline-close submissions.

  6. An Exploratory Study on LLM-Generated Code and Comments in Code Repositories

    cs.SE 2026-07 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Detector proxy analysis of real repositories finds LLM-like code decreasing over time and common in tests, with more in company repos, substantial clones, stable but often ungrammatical comments, and few linked bugs.

  7. Paraphrasing Attack Resilience of Various AI-Generated Text Detection Methods

    cs.LG 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Binoculars-inclusive ensembles detect AI text best overall but suffer the largest performance drops under paraphrasing attacks.

  8. Position: LLM Watermarking Should Align Stakeholders' Incentives for Practical Adoption

    cs.CR 2025-10 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    LLM watermarking adoption is limited by misaligned stakeholder incentives; incentive-aligned approaches such as in-context watermarking can enable practical use in targeted domains like education and peer review.