ChatGPT, is this real? The influence of generative AI on writing style in top-tier cybersecurity papers

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.09316v1
• Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2026 13:34:34 GMT
• Title: ChatGPT, is this real? The influence of generative AI on writing style in top-tier cybersecurity papers
• Abstract summary: GenAI can introduce stylistic changes, often concentrated to a handful of marker words commonly associated with AI usage.<n>This paper investigates whether similar patterns appear in top-tier cybersecurity conference papers (NDSS, USENIX Security, IEEE S&P, and ACM CCS) over the period 2000-2025.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: With the release of ChatGPT in 2022, generative AI has significantly lowered the cost of polishing and rewriting text. Due to its widespread usage, conference organizers instated specific requirements researchers need to adhere to when using GenAI. When asked to rewrite text, GenAI can introduce stylistic changes, often concentrated to a handful of ``marker words`` commonly associated with AI usage. Prior large-scale studies in preprints and biomedical science report post-2022 discontinuities of those marker words and broad linguistic features. This paper investigates whether similar patterns appear in top-tier cybersecurity conference papers (NDSS, USENIX Security, IEEE S\&P, and ACM CCS) over the period 2000-2025. Using text extracted from paper PDFs, we compute lexical and syntactic metrics and track curated marker-word usage. Our findings reveal a gradual long-run drift toward higher lexical complexity and a pronounced post-2022 increase in marker-word usage across all venues showing an emerging trend towards more complex language in cybersecurity papers possibly hindering accessibility.

Related papers

• AI Writers Have a Consistent Stylometric Footprint, but AI Editors Do Not [8.711791966428427]
  Text generated by large language models (LLMs) has been shown to be stylometrically distinct from human-written text.<n>We show that AI generation leaves a consistent stylometric footprint''<n>We show that AI editing, however, does not reproduce the same footprint.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-28T02:58:58Z)
• Operation-Guided Progressive Human-to-AI Text Transformation Benchmark for Multi-Granularity AI-Text Detection [49.41415417307568]
  OpAI-Bench is an operation-guided benchmark for studying progressive human-to-AI text transformation.<n>We show that AI-text detectability is governed not only by the proportion of AI-edited content, but also by edit operation, domain, and cumulative revision history.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-04T17:58:05Z)
• Linguistic Characteristics of AI-Generated Text: A Survey [0.3007949058551534]
  Large language models (LLMs) are solidifying their position in the modern world as effective tools for the automatic generation of text.<n>There is a growing need to study the linguistic features present in AI-generated text.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-01T05:44:28Z)
• Who Gets Seen in the Age of AI? Adoption Patterns of Large Language Models in Scholarly Writing and Citation Outcomes [1.5702201012657682]
  Authors in the Global East adopt AI tools more aggressively, yet Western authors gain more per unit of adoption due to pre-existing penalties for "humanlike" writing.<n>Prestigious journals continue to privilege more human-sounding texts, creating tensions between visibility and gatekeeping.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-10T06:05:34Z)
• Model Misalignment and Language Change: Traces of AI-Associated Language in Unscripted Spoken English [0.0]
  In recent years, written language, particularly in science and education, has undergone remarkable shifts in word usage.<n> Divergences between model output and target audience norms can be viewed as a form of misalignment.<n>We constructed a dataset of 22.1 million words from unscripted spoken language drawn from conversational science and technology podcasts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-01T00:47:33Z)
• ChatGPT as Linguistic Equalizer? Quantifying LLM-Driven Lexical Shifts in Academic Writing [2.0117661599862164]
  This study investigates whether ChatGPT mitigates barriers and fosters equity by analyzing lexical complexity shifts across 2.8 million articles from OpenAlex ( 2020-2024)<n>We demonstrate that ChatGPT significantly enhances lexical complexity in NNES-authored abstracts, even after controlling for article-level controls, authorship patterns, and venue norms.<n>These findings provide causal evidence that ChatGPT reduces linguistic disparities and promotes equity in global academia.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-10T14:11:24Z)
• Almost AI, Almost Human: The Challenge of Detecting AI-Polished Writing [55.2480439325792]
  This study systematically evaluations twelve state-of-the-art AI-text detectors using our AI-Polished-Text Evaluation dataset.<n>Our findings reveal that detectors frequently flag even minimally polished text as AI-generated, struggle to differentiate between degrees of AI involvement, and exhibit biases against older and smaller models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-21T18:45:37Z)
• NLLG Quarterly arXiv Report 09/24: What are the most influential current AI Papers? [21.68589129842815]
  The NLLG arXiv reports assist in navigating the rapidly evolving landscape of NLP and AI research across cs.CL, cs.CV, cs.AI, and cs.LG categories.<n>This fourth installment captures a transformative period in AI history - from January 1, 2023, following ChatGPT's debut, through September 30, 2024.<n>Our analysis reveals substantial new developments in the field - with 45% of the top 40 most-cited papers being new entries since our last report.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-02T22:10:38Z)
• Monitoring AI-Modified Content at Scale: A Case Study on the Impact of ChatGPT on AI Conference Peer Reviews [51.453135368388686]
  We present an approach for estimating the fraction of text in a large corpus which is likely to be substantially modified or produced by a large language model (LLM) Our maximum likelihood model leverages expert-written and AI-generated reference texts to accurately and efficiently examine real-world LLM-use at the corpus level.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-11T21:51:39Z)
• 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)
• Identifying and Mitigating the Security Risks of Generative AI [179.2384121957896]
  This paper reports the findings of a workshop held at Google on the dual-use dilemma posed by GenAI. GenAI can be used just as well by attackers to generate new attacks and increase the velocity and efficacy of existing attacks. We discuss short-term and long-term goals for the community on this topic.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-28T18:51:09Z)
• RecurrentGPT: Interactive Generation of (Arbitrarily) Long Text [81.33699837678229]
  We introduce RecurrentGPT, a language-based simulacrum of the recurrence mechanism in RNNs. At each timestep, RecurrentGPT generates a paragraph of text and updates its language-based long-short term memory. RecurrentGPT is an initial step towards next-generation computer-assisted writing systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-22T17:58:10Z)

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.