StegoStylo: Squelching Stylometric Scrutiny through Steganographic Stitching

Robert Dilworth

arxiv: 2601.09056 · v4 · submitted 2026-01-14 · 💻 cs.CR · cs.CL· cs.IR

StegoStylo: Squelching Stylometric Scrutiny through Steganographic Stitching

Robert Dilworth This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-16 15:19 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.CR cs.CLcs.IR

keywords steganographystylometryauthorship obfuscationadversarial stylometryprivacyzero-width characterstext steganographyauthorship attribution

0 comments

The pith

Steganographic coverage of 33 percent or higher defeats stylometric authorship identification.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper establishes that steganographic insertion of zero-width Unicode characters can mask an author's stylistic fingerprint when combined with adversarial stylometry. By altering at least 33 percent of words in this invisible manner, attribution and verification accuracy from stylometric systems drops to ineffective levels. This addresses privacy risks from stylometry being used for de-anonymization, tracking, and censorship. The work first strengthens the TraceTarnish adversarial attack and then quantifies the obfuscation threshold as a function of the proportion of modified text.

Core claim

Through enhancements to the TraceTarnish adversarial attack and fine-tuned steganographic embedding of zero-width Unicode characters, the paper shows that steganographic coverage of 33% or higher ensures authorship obfuscation by masking stylistic fingerprints.

What carries the argument

Steganographic stitching via zero-width Unicode characters, which invisibly alters word sequences to disrupt stylometric feature extraction without changing visible text.

If this is right

Stylometric attribution and verification become unreliable once 33% or more of words receive steganographic treatment.
Adversarial stylometry gains measurable strength when paired with this form of steganographic modification.
Quantifiable coverage thresholds can guide practical deployment of authorship-hiding tools.
Defensive methods are required to counter stylometry's use in privacy-invasive applications such as profiling.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Wider testing across additional stylometric models and text domains could reveal whether the 33% threshold holds more generally.
Detection methods trained specifically on zero-width character patterns might serve as a countermeasure.
The technique could be layered with other text transformations to raise the modification cost for attackers.

Load-bearing premise

The stylometric systems evaluated are representative of real-world attackers and the steganographic modifications do not create new detectable artifacts exploitable by future systems.

What would settle it

A stylometric system that maintains high attribution accuracy on texts modified with 33% or greater zero-width character coverage would falsify the claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2601.09056 by Robert Dilworth.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: A screenshot of our IDE showing the scenario’s corpus alongside the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: The output of the stylo package’s imposters() function showing the inverse setting–here the clean sample is used as the test text, whereas in the previous figure the adversarial sample served that role. 4 Optimally Injecting Zero-Width Steganographic Payloads to Disturb Authorship Verification The. . . body persists although the component cells may change. Brave New World Aldous Huxley Within the context o… view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: The sample texts comprising our new corpus assess injection optimality, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: The imposters()’s results for our injection-optimality experiment [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: The relationship between injection percentage (x-axis) and authorship [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Stylometry--the identification of an author through analysis of a text's style (i.e., authorship attribution)--serves many constructive purposes: it supports copyright and plagiarism investigations, aids detection of harmful content, offers exploratory cues for certain medical conditions (e.g., early signs of dementia or depression), provides historical context for literary works, and helps uncover misinformation and disinformation. In contrast, when stylometry is employed as a tool for authorship verification--confirming whether a text truly originates from a claimed author--it can also be weaponized for malicious purposes. Techniques such as de-anonymization, re-identification, tracking, profiling, and downstream effects like censorship illustrate the privacy threats that stylometric analysis can enable. Building on these concerns, this paper further explores how adversarial stylometry combined with steganography can counteract stylometric analysis. We first present enhancements to our adversarial attack, $\textit{TraceTarnish}$, providing stronger evidence of its capacity to confound stylometric systems and reduce their attribution and verification accuracy. Next, we examine how steganographic embedding can be fine-tuned to mask an author's stylistic fingerprint, quantifying the level of authorship obfuscation achievable as a function of the proportion of words altered with zero-width Unicode characters. Based on our findings, steganographic coverage of 33% or higher seemingly ensures authorship obfuscation. Finally, we reflect on the ways stylometry can be used to undermine privacy and argue for the necessity of defensive tools like $\textit{TraceTarnish}$.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper layers steganographic zero-width Unicode insertions onto the authors' prior TraceTarnish attack and reports that 33% coverage suffices for authorship obfuscation, but the evaluation does not test against detectors that simply flag or strip those markers.

read the letter

The main thing to know is that this work extends the authors' earlier TraceTarnish attack by adding steganographic stitching with zero-width Unicode characters and claims a concrete 33% coverage threshold that drops stylometric accuracy enough to hide authorship. It frames the privacy risks of stylometry clearly and tries to move from qualitative attack description to a quantified defense level, which is a modest but direct step beyond their previous paper. The combination itself is new enough to be worth noting for people tracking adversarial stylometry techniques. The experimental claim is presented as an empirical finding rather than a fitted parameter, so there is no obvious circularity. What the paper does reasonably well is keep the focus on a practical privacy tool and show how the stego layer can be tuned by coverage proportion. That gives readers a concrete number to think about instead of just another abstract attack. The soft spots are more substantial. The abstract supplies the 33% figure without naming datasets, stylometric systems, baselines, or any statistical detail, so it is impossible to judge whether the threshold is stable or sensitive to particular texts and classifiers. More critically, the stress-test concern lands: if the evaluated stylometers or any realistic attacker can detect non-printing characters or Unicode anomalies and either strip them or treat them as a signal, the obfuscation disappears. The paper gives no sign that it tested against such aware adversaries, which leaves the central result dependent on an unstated assumption that the defense stays invisible. This is not a fatal flaw in the idea, but it is a load-bearing one for the reported number. The work is aimed at researchers who build or evaluate privacy tools against stylometric de-anonymization. A reader already familiar with TraceTarnish or adversarial text generation would get the most out of it, mainly as a prompt for follow-up experiments that include detection-aware baselines. It is coherent on its own terms and shows honest engagement with the literature on both sides of the stylometry debate, so it deserves a serious referee once the methods and robustness checks are filled in.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper presents StegoStylo, which augments the TraceTarnish adversarial stylometry attack by embedding zero-width Unicode characters (e.g., U+200B) into selected words. It reports that steganographic coverage of 33% or higher reduces stylometric attribution and verification accuracy to levels that constitute effective authorship obfuscation. The work also discusses privacy risks of stylometry and calls for defensive tools.

Significance. If the 33% threshold proves robust, the technique would supply a lightweight, practical countermeasure against stylometric de-anonymization, extending prior adversarial stylometry work. The combination of adversarial perturbation with steganography is a natural direction, yet the current evaluation leaves the result's real-world applicability open because it does not address detectors that can simply scan for the inserted markers.

major comments (2)

[Experimental results / 33% threshold claim] The experimental results (implicitly referenced in the abstract and the section describing the 33% threshold) evaluate only unmodified stylometric classifiers. No trials are reported against systems that first detect or strip zero-width Unicode characters, which is a trivial and effective countermeasure. This gap directly affects the central claim that 33% coverage 'ensures' obfuscation, because an aware adversary can neutralize the steganographic signal before stylometric analysis.
[Abstract and results] The abstract states that 'steganographic coverage of 33% or higher seemingly ensures authorship obfuscation' without supplying the underlying dataset sizes, number of authors, baseline accuracies, or statistical tests. Because the threshold appears to be an empirical observation rather than a derived bound, the lack of these details makes it impossible to judge whether the result is robust or post-hoc.

minor comments (2)

[Experimental setup] The paper should explicitly list the stylometric tools, feature sets, and corpora used in the TraceTarnish and StegoStylo experiments so that the 33% figure can be reproduced or challenged.
[Throughout] Notation for the steganographic coverage metric (proportion of words altered) should be defined once and used consistently; the abstract and later sections appear to switch between 'coverage' and 'proportion of words altered' without a formal definition.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments, which highlight important considerations for the robustness and clarity of our evaluation. We address each major comment below and describe the planned revisions.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Experimental results / 33% threshold claim] The experimental results (implicitly referenced in the abstract and the section describing the 33% threshold) evaluate only unmodified stylometric classifiers. No trials are reported against systems that first detect or strip zero-width Unicode characters, which is a trivial and effective countermeasure. This gap directly affects the central claim that 33% coverage 'ensures' obfuscation, because an aware adversary can neutralize the steganographic signal before stylometric analysis.

Authors: We agree that the absence of experiments against zero-width character detectors represents a limitation in assessing real-world applicability. Our evaluation targeted standard stylometric pipelines without preprocessing for such markers, as these reflect the typical threat model for stylometric de-anonymization. In the revised manuscript we will add a dedicated subsection on countermeasures, including detection and stripping of zero-width characters, and report new experimental results quantifying the residual obfuscation effect (if any) after stripping. We will also revise the abstract and results sections to qualify the 33% threshold as applying to unmodified classifiers. revision: yes
Referee: [Abstract and results] The abstract states that 'steganographic coverage of 33% or higher seemingly ensures authorship obfuscation' without supplying the underlying dataset sizes, number of authors, baseline accuracies, or statistical tests. Because the threshold appears to be an empirical observation rather than a derived bound, the lack of these details makes it impossible to judge whether the result is robust or post-hoc.

Authors: The full manuscript reports the experimental configuration (dataset sizes, author counts, baseline accuracies, and statistical tests) in the results section; the abstract employs 'seemingly' precisely to signal that the threshold is an empirical observation. To address the concern, we will revise the abstract to include concise quantitative anchors (e.g., number of authors and baseline accuracy ranges) while preserving brevity, and we will explicitly label the 33% figure as an empirical finding rather than a theoretical guarantee in both the abstract and the results discussion. revision: yes

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

Minor self-citation to prior TraceTarnish work; central claim remains empirical

specific steps

other [Abstract]
"We first present enhancements to our adversarial attack, TraceTarnish, providing stronger evidence of its capacity to confound stylometric systems and reduce their attribution and verification accuracy. Next, we examine how steganographic embedding can be fine-tuned to mask an author's stylistic fingerprint, quantifying the level of authorship obfuscation achievable as a function of the proportion of words altered with zero-width Unicode characters. Based on our findings, steganographic coverage of 33% or higher seemingly ensures authorship obfuscation."

This is a minor self-citation to the authors' own prior attack method. The central 33% threshold claim is presented as a new experimental outcome rather than being forced by or equivalent to the cited prior work, so the self-reference does not create circularity in the reported findings.

full rationale

The paper's core result is an empirical observation that steganographic coverage of 33% or higher reduces stylometric accuracy, derived from experiments on word alterations using zero-width Unicode characters. No equations, fitted parameters, or derivations are presented that reduce the threshold to inputs by construction. The sole self-reference is to the authors' prior TraceTarnish attack as the base being enhanced; this citation supports the method description but does not bear the load of the new quantitative finding or create a self-referential loop. The evaluation limitations noted by the skeptic (e.g., lack of testing against Unicode-aware detectors) represent a potential robustness gap but do not constitute circularity in the derivation chain.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The 33% threshold functions as an empirically fitted parameter; the approach assumes stylometric features are reliably disrupted by invisible character insertions without introducing new signals.

free parameters (1)

33% steganographic coverage threshold
Determined experimentally as the minimum level that ensures obfuscation; appears fitted to observed results rather than derived from first principles.

axioms (1)

domain assumption Stylometric classifiers depend on surface-level stylistic features that can be masked by zero-width character insertions without creating detectable artifacts.
Invoked to justify the steganographic masking approach.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5573 in / 1170 out tokens · 73277 ms · 2026-05-16T15:19:57.640346+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

Hijacking Text Heritage: Hiding the Human Signature through Homoglyphic Substitution
cs.CR 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

Homoglyph substitution on text degrades stylometric systems to hide author signatures and personal information.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

22 extracted references · 22 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 2 internal anchors

[1]

R Documenta- tionhttps://search.r-project.org/CRAN/refmans/stylo/html/imposters.h tml

Authorship verification classifier known as the imposters method. R Documenta- tionhttps://search.r-project.org/CRAN/refmans/stylo/html/imposters.h tml

work page
[2]

Linux Bash (3 2025),https://www.linuxbash.sh/post/match-invisible-unicode-c haracters-eg-zero-width-spaces-using-grep--p

Match invisible unicode characters (eg, zero-width spaces) using ‘grep -p’. Linux Bash (3 2025),https://www.linuxbash.sh/post/match-invisible-unicode-c haracters-eg-zero-width-spaces-using-grep--p

work page 2025
[3]

Abrosimov, K., Grebennikov, A., Tzanetakis, G., Sidorova, A.: Linguistic tools in musical stylometry. Anthology of Computers and the Humanities3, 641–652 (11 StegoStylo 15 2025).https://doi.org/10.63744/Av1c2rVmcj0N,https://anthology.ach.or g/volumes/vol0003/linguistic-tools-in-musical-stylometry/

work page doi:10.63744/av1c2rvmcj0n 2025
[4]

Albaqami, H., Ayub, M.A., Ahmad, N., Ahmad, Y., Alqahtani, M.M., Algamdi, A.M., Owaidah, A.A., Ahmad, K.: Stylometry analysis of human and machine text for academic integrity (1 2026),https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.01225

work page arXiv 2026
[5]

DataSentinel: A Game-Theoretic Detection of Prompt Injection Attacks

Ali Meerza, S.I., Sun, L., Liu, J.: Harmonycloak: Making music unlearnable for generative ai. In: 2025 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP). pp. 430– 448 (2025).https://doi.org/10.1109/SP61157.2025.00085,https://ieeexplo re.ieee.org/document/11023354

work page doi:10.1109/sp61157.2025.00085 2025
[6]

Barrios, J., Gabay, S., Cafiero, F., Debbané, M.: Detecting psychological disorders with stylometry: the case of adhd in adolescent autobiographical narratives (10 2023).https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/s5cm3,https://osf.io/preprints /psyarxiv/s5cm3_v1

work page doi:10.31234/osf.io/s5cm3 2023
[7]

Review of Contemporary Philosophy10, 44–79 (2010),https://nickbostrom.co m/information-hazards.pdf

Bostrom, N.: Information hazards: A typology of potential harms from knowledge. Review of Contemporary Philosophy10, 44–79 (2010),https://nickbostrom.co m/information-hazards.pdf

work page 2010
[8]

legal experts say easy fixes could amplify people’s voices

Dilworth, G.: Constituents are seldom heard in the mississippi legislature. legal experts say easy fixes could amplify people’s voices. Mississippi Today (1 2026), https://mississippitoday.org/2026/01/01/constituents-mississippi-leg islature/

work page 2026
[9]

Dilworth, R.: Tuning for tracetarnish: Techniques, trends, and testing tangible traits (12 2025),https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.03465

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025
[10]

Dilworth, R.: Unveiling unicode’s unseen underpinnings in undermining authorship attribution (10 2025),https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.15840

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025
[11]

Eder,M.:Authorshipverificationwiththepackage‘stylo’.ComputationalStylistics Group (5 2018),https://computationalstylistics.github.io/blog/imposte rs/

work page 2018
[12]

GitHub (2021),https://github.com/XapaJIaMnu/translateLocally,https://private

Heafield, K., Bogoychev, N., Nail, G., van der Linde, J.: translatelocally. GitHub (2021),https://github.com/XapaJIaMnu/translateLocally,https://private. mt/

work page 2021
[13]

YouTube (4 2025),https://yout u.be/xMYm2d9bmEA?si=oYNZZBI0cw6-z9W0

Jordan, B.: The art of poison-pilling music files. YouTube (4 2025),https://yout u.be/xMYm2d9bmEA?si=oYNZZBI0cw6-z9W0

work page 2025
[14]

Digital Scholarship in the Humanities33, 72–81 (12 2017).https: //doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqx011,https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqx011

Koppel, M., Seidman, S.: Detecting pseudepigraphic texts using novel similarity measures. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities33, 72–81 (12 2017).https: //doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqx011,https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqx011

work page doi:10.1093/llc/fqx011 2017
[15]

Lerner, R.: How to cyberstalk – a conversation about adversarial stylometry (7 2025),https://robert-lerner.com/how-to-cyberstalk-a-conversation-abo ut-adversarial-stylometry/

work page 2025
[16]

Mikros, G.: Large language models and forensic linguistics: Navigating opportuni- ties and threats in the age of generative ai (12 2025),https://arxiv.org/abs/25 12.06922

work page 2025
[17]

Expert Systems with Applications276, 127044 (6 2025).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2025.127044,https: //www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0957417425006669

Opara, C., Modesti, P., Golightly, L.: Evaluating spam filters and stylometric de- tection of ai-generated phishing emails. Expert Systems with Applications276, 127044 (6 2025).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2025.127044,https: //www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0957417425006669

work page doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2025.127044 2025
[18]

Cryp- tography6, 17 (4 2022).https://doi.org/10.3390/cryptography6020017, https://www.mdpi.com/2410-387X/6/2/17

Patergianakis, A., Limniotis, K.: Privacy issues in stylometric methods. Cryp- tography6, 17 (4 2022).https://doi.org/10.3390/cryptography6020017, https://www.mdpi.com/2410-387X/6/2/17

work page doi:10.3390/cryptography6020017 2022
[19]

Artificial Intelligence in Medicine132, 102380 (10 2022)

Pérez, A., Parapar, J., Barreiro, A.: Automatic depression score estimation with word embedding models. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine132, 102380 (10 2022). 16 Robert Dilworth https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artmed.2022.102380,https://www.sciencedirec t.com/science/article/pii/S093336572200135X

work page doi:10.1016/j.artmed.2022.102380 2022
[20]

npj Schizophre- nia5, 9 (6 2019).https://doi.org/10.1038/s41537- 019- 0077-9,https: //www.nature.com/articles/s41537-019-0077-9

Rezaii, N., Walker, E., Wolff, P.: A machine learning approach to predicting psychosis using semantic density and latent content analysis. npj Schizophre- nia5, 9 (6 2019).https://doi.org/10.1038/s41537- 019- 0077-9,https: //www.nature.com/articles/s41537-019-0077-9

work page doi:10.1038/s41537- 2019
[21]

GitHub (2024),https://github.com/top-on/llmask

top-on: Llmask. GitHub (2024),https://github.com/top-on/llmask

work page 2024
[22]

In: Proceedings of the 2024 11th Multidisciplinary International Social Networks Conference

Yang, H.C., Hung, Y.L., Wang, L.C.: Stylometry-based fake news classification using text mining techniques. In: Proceedings of the 2024 11th Multidisciplinary International Social Networks Conference. pp. 85–94. ACM (8 2024).https://do i.org/10.1145/3675669.3675682,https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3675669 .3675682

work page doi:10.1145/3675669.3675682 2024

[1] [1]

R Documenta- tionhttps://search.r-project.org/CRAN/refmans/stylo/html/imposters.h tml

Authorship verification classifier known as the imposters method. R Documenta- tionhttps://search.r-project.org/CRAN/refmans/stylo/html/imposters.h tml

work page

[2] [2]

Linux Bash (3 2025),https://www.linuxbash.sh/post/match-invisible-unicode-c haracters-eg-zero-width-spaces-using-grep--p

Match invisible unicode characters (eg, zero-width spaces) using ‘grep -p’. Linux Bash (3 2025),https://www.linuxbash.sh/post/match-invisible-unicode-c haracters-eg-zero-width-spaces-using-grep--p

work page 2025

[3] [3]

Abrosimov, K., Grebennikov, A., Tzanetakis, G., Sidorova, A.: Linguistic tools in musical stylometry. Anthology of Computers and the Humanities3, 641–652 (11 StegoStylo 15 2025).https://doi.org/10.63744/Av1c2rVmcj0N,https://anthology.ach.or g/volumes/vol0003/linguistic-tools-in-musical-stylometry/

work page doi:10.63744/av1c2rvmcj0n 2025

[4] [4]

Albaqami, H., Ayub, M.A., Ahmad, N., Ahmad, Y., Alqahtani, M.M., Algamdi, A.M., Owaidah, A.A., Ahmad, K.: Stylometry analysis of human and machine text for academic integrity (1 2026),https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.01225

work page arXiv 2026

[5] [5]

DataSentinel: A Game-Theoretic Detection of Prompt Injection Attacks

Ali Meerza, S.I., Sun, L., Liu, J.: Harmonycloak: Making music unlearnable for generative ai. In: 2025 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP). pp. 430– 448 (2025).https://doi.org/10.1109/SP61157.2025.00085,https://ieeexplo re.ieee.org/document/11023354

work page doi:10.1109/sp61157.2025.00085 2025

[6] [6]

Barrios, J., Gabay, S., Cafiero, F., Debbané, M.: Detecting psychological disorders with stylometry: the case of adhd in adolescent autobiographical narratives (10 2023).https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/s5cm3,https://osf.io/preprints /psyarxiv/s5cm3_v1

work page doi:10.31234/osf.io/s5cm3 2023

[7] [7]

Review of Contemporary Philosophy10, 44–79 (2010),https://nickbostrom.co m/information-hazards.pdf

Bostrom, N.: Information hazards: A typology of potential harms from knowledge. Review of Contemporary Philosophy10, 44–79 (2010),https://nickbostrom.co m/information-hazards.pdf

work page 2010

[8] [8]

legal experts say easy fixes could amplify people’s voices

Dilworth, G.: Constituents are seldom heard in the mississippi legislature. legal experts say easy fixes could amplify people’s voices. Mississippi Today (1 2026), https://mississippitoday.org/2026/01/01/constituents-mississippi-leg islature/

work page 2026

[9] [9]

Dilworth, R.: Tuning for tracetarnish: Techniques, trends, and testing tangible traits (12 2025),https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.03465

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

[10] [10]

Dilworth, R.: Unveiling unicode’s unseen underpinnings in undermining authorship attribution (10 2025),https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.15840

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

[11] [11]

Eder,M.:Authorshipverificationwiththepackage‘stylo’.ComputationalStylistics Group (5 2018),https://computationalstylistics.github.io/blog/imposte rs/

work page 2018

[12] [12]

GitHub (2021),https://github.com/XapaJIaMnu/translateLocally,https://private

Heafield, K., Bogoychev, N., Nail, G., van der Linde, J.: translatelocally. GitHub (2021),https://github.com/XapaJIaMnu/translateLocally,https://private. mt/

work page 2021

[13] [13]

YouTube (4 2025),https://yout u.be/xMYm2d9bmEA?si=oYNZZBI0cw6-z9W0

Jordan, B.: The art of poison-pilling music files. YouTube (4 2025),https://yout u.be/xMYm2d9bmEA?si=oYNZZBI0cw6-z9W0

work page 2025

[14] [14]

Digital Scholarship in the Humanities33, 72–81 (12 2017).https: //doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqx011,https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqx011

Koppel, M., Seidman, S.: Detecting pseudepigraphic texts using novel similarity measures. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities33, 72–81 (12 2017).https: //doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqx011,https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqx011

work page doi:10.1093/llc/fqx011 2017

[15] [15]

Lerner, R.: How to cyberstalk – a conversation about adversarial stylometry (7 2025),https://robert-lerner.com/how-to-cyberstalk-a-conversation-abo ut-adversarial-stylometry/

work page 2025

[16] [16]

Mikros, G.: Large language models and forensic linguistics: Navigating opportuni- ties and threats in the age of generative ai (12 2025),https://arxiv.org/abs/25 12.06922

work page 2025

[17] [17]

Expert Systems with Applications276, 127044 (6 2025).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2025.127044,https: //www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0957417425006669

Opara, C., Modesti, P., Golightly, L.: Evaluating spam filters and stylometric de- tection of ai-generated phishing emails. Expert Systems with Applications276, 127044 (6 2025).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2025.127044,https: //www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0957417425006669

work page doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2025.127044 2025

[18] [18]

Cryp- tography6, 17 (4 2022).https://doi.org/10.3390/cryptography6020017, https://www.mdpi.com/2410-387X/6/2/17

Patergianakis, A., Limniotis, K.: Privacy issues in stylometric methods. Cryp- tography6, 17 (4 2022).https://doi.org/10.3390/cryptography6020017, https://www.mdpi.com/2410-387X/6/2/17

work page doi:10.3390/cryptography6020017 2022

[19] [19]

Artificial Intelligence in Medicine132, 102380 (10 2022)

Pérez, A., Parapar, J., Barreiro, A.: Automatic depression score estimation with word embedding models. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine132, 102380 (10 2022). 16 Robert Dilworth https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artmed.2022.102380,https://www.sciencedirec t.com/science/article/pii/S093336572200135X

work page doi:10.1016/j.artmed.2022.102380 2022

[20] [20]

npj Schizophre- nia5, 9 (6 2019).https://doi.org/10.1038/s41537- 019- 0077-9,https: //www.nature.com/articles/s41537-019-0077-9

Rezaii, N., Walker, E., Wolff, P.: A machine learning approach to predicting psychosis using semantic density and latent content analysis. npj Schizophre- nia5, 9 (6 2019).https://doi.org/10.1038/s41537- 019- 0077-9,https: //www.nature.com/articles/s41537-019-0077-9

work page doi:10.1038/s41537- 2019

[21] [21]

GitHub (2024),https://github.com/top-on/llmask

top-on: Llmask. GitHub (2024),https://github.com/top-on/llmask

work page 2024

[22] [22]

In: Proceedings of the 2024 11th Multidisciplinary International Social Networks Conference

Yang, H.C., Hung, Y.L., Wang, L.C.: Stylometry-based fake news classification using text mining techniques. In: Proceedings of the 2024 11th Multidisciplinary International Social Networks Conference. pp. 85–94. ACM (8 2024).https://do i.org/10.1145/3675669.3675682,https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3675669 .3675682

work page doi:10.1145/3675669.3675682 2024