Mixture of Detectors: A Compact View of Machine-Generated Text Detection

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2509.22147v1
• Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2025 10:05:22 GMT
• Title: Mixture of Detectors: A Compact View of Machine-Generated Text Detection
• Authors: Sai Teja Lekkala, Yadagiri Annepaka, Arun Kumar Challa, Samatha Reddy Machireddy, Partha Pakray, Chukhu Chunka,
• Abstract summary: This paper addresses machine-generated text detection across several scenarios, including document-level binary and multiclass classification or generator attribution.<n>We introduce a new work called BMAS English: an English language dataset for binary classification of human and machine text, for multiclass classification, and Adrial attack addressing where it is a common act for the mitigation of detection.
• Score: 2.4013793000097103
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are gearing up to surpass human creativity. The veracity of the statement needs careful consideration. In recent developments, critical questions arise regarding the authenticity of human work and the preservation of their creativity and innovative abilities. This paper investigates such issues. This paper addresses machine-generated text detection across several scenarios, including document-level binary and multiclass classification or generator attribution, sentence-level segmentation to differentiate between human-AI collaborative text, and adversarial attacks aimed at reducing the detectability of machine-generated text. We introduce a new work called BMAS English: an English language dataset for binary classification of human and machine text, for multiclass classification, which not only identifies machine-generated text but can also try to determine its generator, and Adversarial attack addressing where it is a common act for the mitigation of detection, and Sentence-level segmentation, for predicting the boundaries between human and machine-generated text. We believe that this paper will address previous work in Machine-Generated Text Detection (MGTD) in a more meaningful way.

Related papers

• Human Texts Are Outliers: Detecting LLM-generated Texts via Out-of-distribution Detection [71.59834293521074]
  We develop a framework to distinguish between human-authored and machine-generated text.<n>Our method achieves 98.3% AUROC and AUPR with only 8.9% FPR95 on DeepFake dataset.<n>Code, pretrained weights, and demo will be released.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-07T08:14:45Z)
• RKadiyala at SemEval-2024 Task 8: Black-Box Word-Level Text Boundary Detection in Partially Machine Generated Texts [0.0]
  This paper introduces few reliable approaches for identifying which part of a given text is machine generated at a word level. We present a comparison with proprietary systems, performance of our model on unseen domains' and generators' texts. The findings reveal significant improvements in detection accuracy along with comparison on other aspects of detection capabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-22T03:21:59Z)
• Detecting Machine-Generated Long-Form Content with Latent-Space Variables [54.07946647012579]
  Existing zero-shot detectors primarily focus on token-level distributions, which are vulnerable to real-world domain shifts. We propose a more robust method that incorporates abstract elements, such as event transitions, as key deciding factors to detect machine versus human texts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-04T18:42:09Z)
• Exploring the Limitations of Detecting Machine-Generated Text [29.06307663406079]
  We audit the classification performance for detecting machine-generated text by evaluating on texts with varying writing styles.<n>We find that classifiers are highly sensitive to stylistic changes and differences in text complexity.<n>We recommend that future work attends to stylistic factors and reading difficulty levels of human-written and machine-generated text.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-16T21:02:02Z)
• Deciphering Textual Authenticity: A Generalized Strategy through the Lens of Large Language Semantics for Detecting Human vs. Machine-Generated Text [8.290557547578146]
  We introduce a novel system, T5LLMCipher, for detecting machine-generated text using a pretrained T5 encoder combined with LLM embedding sub-clustering. We find that our approach provides state-of-the-art generalization ability, with an average increase in F1 score on machine-generated text of 19.6% on unseen generators and domains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-17T18:45:13Z)
• Towards Possibilities & Impossibilities of AI-generated Text Detection: A Survey [97.33926242130732]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have revolutionized the domain of natural language processing (NLP) with remarkable capabilities of generating human-like text responses. Despite these advancements, several works in the existing literature have raised serious concerns about the potential misuse of LLMs. To address these concerns, a consensus among the research community is to develop algorithmic solutions to detect AI-generated text.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-23T18:11:32Z)
• Watermarking Conditional Text Generation for AI Detection: Unveiling Challenges and a Semantic-Aware Watermark Remedy [52.765898203824975]
  We introduce a semantic-aware watermarking algorithm that considers the characteristics of conditional text generation and the input context. Experimental results demonstrate that our proposed method yields substantial improvements across various text generation models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-25T20:24:22Z)
• Red Teaming Language Model Detectors with Language Models [114.36392560711022]
  Large language models (LLMs) present significant safety and ethical risks if exploited by malicious users. Recent works have proposed algorithms to detect LLM-generated text and protect LLMs. We study two types of attack strategies: 1) replacing certain words in an LLM's output with their synonyms given the context; 2) automatically searching for an instructional prompt to alter the writing style of the generation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-31T10:08:37Z)
• MAGE: Machine-generated Text Detection in the Wild [82.70561073277801]
  Large language models (LLMs) have achieved human-level text generation, emphasizing the need for effective AI-generated text detection. We build a comprehensive testbed by gathering texts from diverse human writings and texts generated by different LLMs. Despite challenges, the top-performing detector can identify 86.54% out-of-domain texts generated by a new LLM, indicating the feasibility for application scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-22T17:13:29Z)
• On the Possibilities of AI-Generated Text Detection [76.55825911221434]
  We argue that as machine-generated text approximates human-like quality, the sample size needed for detection bounds increases. 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.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-10T17:47:39Z)
• RoFT: A Tool for Evaluating Human Detection of Machine-Generated Text [25.80571756447762]
  We present Real or Fake Text (RoFT), a website that invites users to try their hand at detecting machine-generated text. We show preliminary results of using RoFT to evaluate detection of machine-generated news articles.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-06T22:47:43Z)

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.