Human Texts Are Outliers: Detecting LLM-generated Texts via Out-of-distribution Detection

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2510.08602v1
• Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2025 08:14:45 GMT
• Title: Human Texts Are Outliers: Detecting LLM-generated Texts via Out-of-distribution Detection
• Authors: Cong Zeng, Shengkun Tang, Yuanzhou Chen, Zhiqiang Shen, Wenchao Yu, Xujiang Zhao, Haifeng Chen, Wei Cheng, Zhiqiang Xu,
• Abstract summary: 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.
• Score: 71.59834293521074
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The rapid advancement of large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT, DeepSeek, and Claude has significantly increased the presence of AI-generated text in digital communication. This trend has heightened the need for reliable detection methods to distinguish between human-authored and machine-generated content. Existing approaches both zero-shot methods and supervised classifiers largely conceptualize this task as a binary classification problem, often leading to poor generalization across domains and models. In this paper, we argue that such a binary formulation fundamentally mischaracterizes the detection task by assuming a coherent representation of human-written texts. In reality, human texts do not constitute a unified distribution, and their diversity cannot be effectively captured through limited sampling. This causes previous classifiers to memorize observed OOD characteristics rather than learn the essence of `non-ID' behavior, limiting generalization to unseen human-authored inputs. Based on this observation, we propose reframing the detection task as an out-of-distribution (OOD) detection problem, treating human-written texts as distributional outliers while machine-generated texts are in-distribution (ID) samples. To this end, we develop a detection framework using one-class learning method including DeepSVDD and HRN, and score-based learning techniques such as energy-based method, enabling robust and generalizable performance. Extensive experiments across multiple datasets validate the effectiveness of our OOD-based approach. Specifically, the OOD-based method achieves 98.3% AUROC and AUPR with only 8.9% FPR95 on DeepFake dataset. Moreover, we test our detection framework on multilingual, attacked, and unseen-model and -domain text settings, demonstrating the robustness and generalizability of our framework. Code, pretrained weights, and demo will be released.

Related papers

• RepreGuard: Detecting LLM-Generated Text by Revealing Hidden Representation Patterns [50.401907401444404]
  Large language models (LLMs) are crucial for preventing misuse and building trustworthy AI systems.<n>We propose RepreGuard, an efficient statistics-based detection method.<n> Experimental results show that RepreGuard outperforms all baselines with average 94.92% AUROC on both in-distribution (ID) and OOD scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-18T17:59:15Z)
• Text-ADBench: Text Anomaly Detection Benchmark based on LLMs Embedding [27.02879006439693]
  This work performs a comprehensive empirical study and introduces a benchmark for text anomaly detection.<n>Our work systematically evaluates the effectiveness of embedding-based text anomaly detection.<n>By open-sourcing our benchmark toolkit, this work provides a foundation for future research in robust and scalable text anomaly detection systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-16T14:47:41Z)
• HACo-Det: A Study Towards Fine-Grained Machine-Generated Text Detection under Human-AI Coauthoring [14.887491317701997]
  This paper explores the possibility of fine-grained MGT detection under human-AI coauthoring.<n>We suggest fine-grained detectors can pave pathways toward coauthored text detection with a numeric AI ratio.<n> Empirical results show that metric-based methods struggle to conduct fine-grained detection with a 0.462 average F1 score.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-03T14:52:44Z)
• DeTeCtive: Detecting AI-generated Text via Multi-Level Contrastive Learning [24.99797253885887]
  We argue that the key to accomplishing this task lies in distinguishing writing styles of different authors. We propose DeTeCtive, a multi-task auxiliary, multi-level contrastive learning framework. Our method is compatible with a range of text encoders.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-28T12:34:49Z)
• 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)
• ESPERANTO: Evaluating Synthesized Phrases to Enhance Robustness in AI Detection for Text Origination [1.8418334324753884]
  This paper introduces back-translation as a novel technique for evading detection. We present a model that combines these back-translated texts to produce a manipulated version of the original AI-generated text. We evaluate this technique on nine AI detectors, including six open-source and three proprietary systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-22T01:13:22Z)
• Who Wrote This? The Key to Zero-Shot LLM-Generated Text Detection Is GECScore [51.65730053591696]
  We propose a simple yet effective black-box zero-shot detection approach based on the observation that human-written texts typically contain more grammatical errors than LLM-generated texts.<n> Experimental results show that our method outperforms current state-of-the-art (SOTA) zero-shot and supervised methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-07T12:57:01Z)
• DetectGPT-SC: Improving Detection of Text Generated by Large Language Models through Self-Consistency with Masked Predictions [13.077729125193434]
  Existing detectors are built on the assumption that there is a distribution gap between human-generated and AI-generated texts. We find that large language models such as ChatGPT exhibit strong self-consistency in text generation and continuation. We propose a new method for AI-generated texts detection based on self-consistency with masked predictions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-23T01:23:10Z)
• Language Model Decoding as Direct Metrics Optimization [87.68281625776282]
  Current decoding methods struggle to generate texts that align with human texts across different aspects. In this work, we frame decoding from a language model as an optimization problem with the goal of strictly matching the expected performance with human texts. We prove that this induced distribution is guaranteed to improve the perplexity on human texts, which suggests a better approximation to the underlying distribution of human texts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-02T09:35:27Z)
• 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)
• MGTBench: Benchmarking Machine-Generated Text Detection [54.81446366272403]
  This paper proposes the first benchmark framework for MGT detection against powerful large language models (LLMs) We show that a larger number of words in general leads to better performance and most detection methods can achieve similar performance with much fewer training samples. Our findings indicate that the model-based detection methods still perform well in the text attribution task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-26T21:12:36Z)

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.