AI Content Self-Detection for Transformer-based Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2312.17289v1
• Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2023 10:08:57 GMT
• Title: AI Content Self-Detection for Transformer-based Large Language Models
• Authors: Ant\^onio Junior Alves Caiado and Michael Hahsler
• Abstract summary: This paper introduces the idea of direct origin detection and evaluates whether generative AI systems can recognize their output and distinguish it from human-written texts. Google's Bard model exhibits the largest capability of self-detection with an accuracy of 94%, followed by OpenAI's ChatGPT with 83%.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: $ $The usage of generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools based on large language models, including ChatGPT, Bard, and Claude, for text generation has many exciting applications with the potential for phenomenal productivity gains. One issue is authorship attribution when using AI tools. This is especially important in an academic setting where the inappropriate use of generative AI tools may hinder student learning or stifle research by creating a large amount of automatically generated derivative work. Existing plagiarism detection systems can trace the source of submitted text but are not yet equipped with methods to accurately detect AI-generated text. This paper introduces the idea of direct origin detection and evaluates whether generative AI systems can recognize their output and distinguish it from human-written texts. We argue why current transformer-based models may be able to self-detect their own generated text and perform a small empirical study using zero-shot learning to investigate if that is the case. Results reveal varying capabilities of AI systems to identify their generated text. Google's Bard model exhibits the largest capability of self-detection with an accuracy of 94\%, followed by OpenAI's ChatGPT with 83\%. On the other hand, Anthropic's Claude model seems to be not able to self-detect.

Related papers

• An Empirical Study on Automatically Detecting AI-Generated Source Code: How Far Are We? [8.0988059417354]
  We propose a range of approaches to improve the performance of AI-generated code detection. Our best model outperforms state-of-the-art AI-generated code detector (GPTSniffer) and achieves an F1 score of 82.55.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-06T22:48:18Z)
• LLM-DetectAIve: a Tool for Fine-Grained Machine-Generated Text Detection [87.43727192273772]
  It is often hard to tell whether a piece of text was human-written or machine-generated. We present LLM-DetectAIve, designed for fine-grained detection. It supports four categories: (i) human-written, (ii) machine-generated, (iii) machine-written, then machine-humanized, and (iv) human-written, then machine-polished.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-08T07:43:17Z)
• Detecting AI Generated Text Based on NLP and Machine Learning Approaches [0.0]
  Recent advances in natural language processing may enable AI models to generate writing that is identical to human written form in the future. This might have profound ethical, legal, and social repercussions. Our approach includes a machine learning methods that can differentiate between electronically produced text and human-written text.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-15T16:37:44Z)
• Generative AI in Writing Research Papers: A New Type of Algorithmic Bias and Uncertainty in Scholarly Work [0.38850145898707145]
  Large language models (LLMs) and generative AI tools present challenges in identifying and addressing biases. generative AI tools are susceptible to goal misgeneralization, hallucinations, and adversarial attacks such as red teaming prompts. We find that incorporating generative AI in the process of writing research manuscripts introduces a new type of context-induced algorithmic bias.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-04T04:05:04Z)
• AI-Generated Images as Data Source: The Dawn of Synthetic Era [61.879821573066216]
  generative AI has unlocked the potential to create synthetic images that closely resemble real-world photographs. This paper explores the innovative concept of harnessing these AI-generated images as new data sources. In contrast to real data, AI-generated data exhibit remarkable advantages, including unmatched abundance and scalability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-03T06:55:19Z)
• Testing of Detection Tools for AI-Generated Text [0.0]
  The paper examines the functionality of detection tools for artificial intelligence generated text. It evaluates them based on accuracy and error type analysis. The research covers 12 publicly available tools and two commercial systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-21T16:29:44Z)
• Smaller Language Models are Better Black-box Machine-Generated Text Detectors [56.36291277897995]
  Small and partially-trained models are better universal text detectors. We find that whether the detector and generator were trained on the same data is not critically important to the detection success. For instance, the OPT-125M model has an AUC of 0.81 in detecting ChatGPT generations, whereas a larger model from the GPT family, GPTJ-6B, has AUC of 0.45.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-17T00:09:08Z)
• Paraphrasing evades detectors of AI-generated text, but retrieval is an effective defense [56.077252790310176]
  We present a paraphrase generation model (DIPPER) that can paraphrase paragraphs, condition on surrounding context, and control lexical diversity and content reordering. Using DIPPER to paraphrase text generated by three large language models (including GPT3.5-davinci-003) successfully evades several detectors, including watermarking. We introduce a simple defense that relies on retrieving semantically-similar generations and must be maintained by a language model API provider.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-23T16:29:27Z)
• Can AI-Generated Text be Reliably Detected? [54.670136179857344]
  Unregulated use of LLMs can potentially lead to malicious consequences such as plagiarism, generating fake news, spamming, etc. Recent works attempt to tackle this problem either using certain model signatures present in the generated text outputs or by applying watermarking techniques. In this paper, we show that these detectors are not reliable in practical scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-17T17:53:19Z)
• Are You Robert or RoBERTa? Deceiving Online Authorship Attribution Models Using Neural Text Generators [3.9533044769534444]
  GPT-2 and XLM language models are used to generate texts using existing posts of online users. We then examine whether these AI-based text generators are capable of mimicking authorial style to such a degree that they can deceive typical AA models. Our findings highlight the current capacity of powerful natural language models to generate original online posts capable of mimicking authorial style.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-18T09:19:14Z)
• GenNI: Human-AI Collaboration for Data-Backed Text Generation [102.08127062293111]
  Table2Text systems generate textual output based on structured data utilizing machine learning. GenNI (Generation Negotiation Interface) is an interactive visual system for high-level human-AI collaboration in producing descriptive text.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-19T18:07:07Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.