{"record_type":"pith_number_record","schema_url":"https://pith.science/schemas/pith-number/v1.json","pith_number":"pith:2026:OB35U2QS3XMGUJLK7QDWSZU6HN","short_pith_number":"pith:OB35U2QS","schema_version":"1.0","canonical_sha256":"7077da6a12ddd86a256afc0769669e3b576bba721167dc7650c540c01dc28d2e","source":{"kind":"arxiv","id":"2604.03136","version":5},"attestation_state":"computed","paper":{"title":"StoryScope: Investigating idiosyncrasies in AI fiction","license":"http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/","headline":"Narrative features alone distinguish AI fiction from human writing at 93 percent accuracy.","cross_cats":[],"primary_cat":"cs.CL","authors_text":"Chau Minh Pham, Jenna Russell, John Wieting, Mohit Iyyer, Rishanth Rajendhran","submitted_at":"2026-04-03T15:56:38Z","abstract_excerpt":"As AI-generated fiction becomes increasingly prevalent, questions of authorship and originality are becoming central to how written work is evaluated. While most existing work in this space focuses on identifying surface-level signatures of AI writing, we ask instead whether AI-generated stories can be distinguished from human ones without relying on stylistic signals, focusing on discourse-level narrative choices such as character agency and chronological discontinuity. We propose StoryScope, a pipeline that automatically induces a fine-grained, interpretable feature space of discourse-level "},"verification_status":{"content_addressed":true,"pith_receipt":true,"author_attested":false,"weak_author_claims":0,"strong_author_claims":0,"externally_anchored":false,"storage_verified":false,"citation_signatures":0,"replication_records":0,"graph_snapshot":true,"references_resolved":false,"formal_links_present":true},"canonical_record":{"source":{"id":"2604.03136","kind":"arxiv","version":5},"metadata":{"license":"http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/","primary_cat":"cs.CL","submitted_at":"2026-04-03T15:56:38Z","cross_cats_sorted":[],"title_canon_sha256":"59581cc8e8ac19c8af26f1d2822d97511168c4e2a45ba37696ff63637509039f","abstract_canon_sha256":"bbd5e9f3fefa885c2a22787135b736f62bae63407214d31cf46d1ce49fb14e88"},"schema_version":"1.0"},"receipt":{"kind":"pith_receipt","key_id":"pith-v1-2026-05","algorithm":"ed25519","signed_at":"2026-08-04T02:40:34.075460Z","signature_b64":"MLc9EeO4ioYTIU1hus+HRcLKD6GYV00OTxbXaBO3lbTsAnhk61/IH1II37eEmhvJ0mvOixZJlRGim+5eor4ZCA==","signed_message":"canonical_sha256_bytes","builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1","receipt_version":"0.3","canonical_sha256":"7077da6a12ddd86a256afc0769669e3b576bba721167dc7650c540c01dc28d2e","last_reissued_at":"2026-08-04T02:40:34.072940Z","signature_status":"signed_v1","first_computed_at":"2026-08-04T02:40:34.072940Z","public_key_fingerprint":"8d4b5ee74e4693bcd1df2446408b0d54"},"graph_snapshot":{"paper":{"title":"StoryScope: Investigating idiosyncrasies in AI fiction","license":"http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/","headline":"Narrative features alone distinguish AI fiction from human writing at 93 percent accuracy.","cross_cats":[],"primary_cat":"cs.CL","authors_text":"Chau Minh Pham, Jenna Russell, John Wieting, Mohit Iyyer, Rishanth Rajendhran","submitted_at":"2026-04-03T15:56:38Z","abstract_excerpt":"As AI-generated fiction becomes increasingly prevalent, questions of authorship and originality are becoming central to how written work is evaluated. While most existing work in this space focuses on identifying surface-level signatures of AI writing, we ask instead whether AI-generated stories can be distinguished from human ones without relying on stylistic signals, focusing on discourse-level narrative choices such as character agency and chronological discontinuity. We propose StoryScope, a pipeline that automatically induces a fine-grained, interpretable feature space of discourse-level "},"claims":{"count":4,"items":[{"kind":"strongest_claim","text":"Narrative features alone achieve 93.2% macro-F1 for human vs. AI detection and 68.4% macro-F1 for six-way authorship attribution, retaining over 97% of the performance of models that include stylistic cues.","source":"verdict.strongest_claim","status":"machine_extracted","claim_id":"C1","attestation":"unclaimed"},{"kind":"weakest_assumption","text":"That the automatically induced discourse-level features capture narrative choices independent of surface stylistic signals and that the parallel corpus of prompts sufficiently controls for content to isolate true narrative differences.","source":"verdict.weakest_assumption","status":"machine_extracted","claim_id":"C2","attestation":"unclaimed"},{"kind":"one_line_summary","text":"StoryScope extracts narrative features showing AI stories favor tidy plots and over-explain themes while human stories show more moral ambiguity and temporal complexity, enabling strong detection and attribution.","source":"verdict.one_line_summary","status":"machine_extracted","claim_id":"C3","attestation":"unclaimed"},{"kind":"headline","text":"Narrative features alone distinguish AI fiction from human writing at 93 percent accuracy.","source":"verdict.pith_extraction.headline","status":"machine_extracted","claim_id":"C4","attestation":"unclaimed"}],"snapshot_sha256":"f346c51796a483c39b70f7f30535455d78830204c2d6047f15ed03383dcbc734"},"source":{"id":"2604.03136","kind":"arxiv","version":5},"verdict":{"id":"f798570f-9403-473c-ae8d-f084c80a9cdb","model_set":{"reader":"grok-4.3"},"created_at":"2026-05-13T20:21:18.491973Z","strongest_claim":"Narrative features alone achieve 93.2% macro-F1 for human vs. AI detection and 68.4% macro-F1 for six-way authorship attribution, retaining over 97% of the performance of models that include stylistic cues.","one_line_summary":"StoryScope extracts narrative features showing AI stories favor tidy plots and over-explain themes while human stories show more moral ambiguity and temporal complexity, enabling strong detection and attribution.","pipeline_version":"pith-pipeline@v0.9.0","weakest_assumption":"That the automatically induced discourse-level features capture narrative choices independent of surface stylistic signals and that the parallel corpus of prompts sufficiently controls for content to isolate true narrative differences.","pith_extraction_headline":"Narrative features alone distinguish AI fiction from human writing at 93 percent accuracy."},"integrity":{"clean":true,"summary":{"advisory":0,"critical":0,"by_detector":{},"informational":0},"endpoint":"/pith/2604.03136/integrity.json","findings":[],"available":true,"detectors_run":[],"snapshot_sha256":"c28c3603d3b5d939e8dc4c7e95fa8dfce3d595e45f758748cecf8e644a296938"},"references":{"count":0,"sample":[],"resolved_work":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57","internal_anchors":0},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":2,"snapshot_sha256":"4ea033bf1e6aaedf50057541176ee1954079f154b1e7f287cbced3cf7527e1ae"},"author_claims":{"count":0,"strong_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1"},"aliases":[{"alias_kind":"arxiv","alias_value":"2604.03136","created_at":"2026-08-04T02:40:34.075268+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"arxiv_version","alias_value":"2604.03136v5","created_at":"2026-08-04T02:40:34.075268+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"doi","alias_value":"10.48550/arxiv.2604.03136","created_at":"2026-08-04T02:40:34.075268+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_12","alias_value":"OB35U2QS3XMG","created_at":"2026-08-04T02:40:34.075268+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_16","alias_value":"OB35U2QS3XMGUJLK","created_at":"2026-08-04T02:40:34.075268+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_8","alias_value":"OB35U2QS","created_at":"2026-08-04T02:40:34.075268+00:00"}],"events":[],"event_summary":{},"paper_claims":[],"inbound_citations":{"count":1,"internal_anchor_count":1,"sample":[{"citing_arxiv_id":"2606.02293","citing_title":"AI as a Tool for Simulation-Based Experiments in Literary Studies","ref_index":105,"is_internal_anchor":true}]},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":2,"sample":[],"anchors":[]},"links":{"html":"https://pith.science/pith/OB35U2QS3XMGUJLK7QDWSZU6HN","json":"https://pith.science/pith/OB35U2QS3XMGUJLK7QDWSZU6HN.json","graph_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/OB35U2QS3XMGUJLK7QDWSZU6HN/graph.json","events_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/OB35U2QS3XMGUJLK7QDWSZU6HN/events.json","paper":"https://pith.science/paper/OB35U2QS"},"agent_actions":{"view_html":"https://pith.science/pith/OB35U2QS3XMGUJLK7QDWSZU6HN","download_json":"https://pith.science/pith/OB35U2QS3XMGUJLK7QDWSZU6HN.json","view_paper":"https://pith.science/paper/OB35U2QS","resolve_alias":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/resolve?arxiv=2604.03136&json=true","fetch_graph":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/OB35U2QS3XMGUJLK7QDWSZU6HN/graph.json","fetch_events":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/OB35U2QS3XMGUJLK7QDWSZU6HN/events.json","actions":{"anchor_timestamp":"https://pith.science/pith/OB35U2QS3XMGUJLK7QDWSZU6HN/action/timestamp_anchor","attest_storage":"https://pith.science/pith/OB35U2QS3XMGUJLK7QDWSZU6HN/action/storage_attestation","attest_author":"https://pith.science/pith/OB35U2QS3XMGUJLK7QDWSZU6HN/action/author_attestation","sign_citation":"https://pith.science/pith/OB35U2QS3XMGUJLK7QDWSZU6HN/action/citation_signature","submit_replication":"https://pith.science/pith/OB35U2QS3XMGUJLK7QDWSZU6HN/action/replication_record"}},"created_at":"2026-08-04T02:40:34.075268+00:00","updated_at":"2026-08-04T02:40:34.075268+00:00"}