Counter Turing Test (CT2): Investigating AI-Generated Text Detection for Hindi - Ranking LLMs based on Hindi AI Detectability Index (ADI_hi) (2024.findings-emnlp)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | a growing number of large language models are being used to detect AI-generated text . a recent study has found that some techniques to bypass detection are fragile . |
| Approach: | They propose to use 26 LLMs to evaluate their proficiency in generating Hindi text . they propose to introduce a Hindi AI Detectability Index to assess and rank LLM models based on their detectability levels. |
| Outcome: | The proposed methods are effective in English, but struggle in Hindi . the proposed methods show that they are susceptible to fragility . |
Similar Papers
Counter Turing Test (CT2): AI-Generated Text Detection is Not as Easy as You May Think - Introducing AI Detectability Index (ADI) (2023.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
Megha Chakraborty, S.M Towhidul Islam Tonmoy, S M Mehedi Zaman, Shreya Gautam, Tanay Kumar, Krish Sharma, Niyar Barman, Chandan Gupta, Vinija Jain, Aman Chadha, Amit Sheth, Amitava Das
| Challenge: | a number of issues have arisen regarding the risk and consequences of AI-generated text detection. |
| Approach: | They propose a counter-turing test to evaluate the robustness of existing AGTD methods . they propose ADI, a quantifiable spectrum to assess detectability of LLMs . |
| Outcome: | The proposed method evaluates the robustness of existing AGTD methods . it shows that larger LLMs tend to have lower ADI, indicating they are less detectable . |
LLM-DetectAIve: a Tool for Fine-Grained Machine-Generated Text Detection (2024.emnlp-demo)
Copied to clipboard
Mervat Abassy, Kareem Elozeiri, Alexander Aziz, Minh Ta, Raj Tomar, Bimarsha Adhikari, Saad Ahmed, Yuxia Wang, Osama Mohammed Afzal, Zhuohan Xie, Jonibek Mansurov, Ekaterina Artemova, Vladislav Mikhailov, Rui Xing, Jiahui Geng, Hasan Iqbal, Zain Mujahid, Tarek Mahmoud, Akim Tsvigun, Alham Aji, Artem Shelmanov, Nizar Habash, Iryna Gurevych, Preslav Nakov
| Challenge: | a large number of machine-generated texts are often hard to distinguish between human-written and machine-generated text . this raises concerns about potential misuse, especially within educational and academic domains . |
| Approach: | They propose a system that can detect whether a text is human-written or machine-generated . they use a fine-grained classification schema to identify the use of machine-generated text . |
| Outcome: | The proposed system can distinguish between human-written and machine-generated text . it can detect attempts to obfuscate the fact that a text was machine- generated . |
M4: Multi-generator, Multi-domain, and Multi-lingual Black-Box Machine-Generated Text Detection (2024.eacl-long)
Copied to clipboard
Yuxia Wang, Jonibek Mansurov, Petar Ivanov, Jinyan Su, Artem Shelmanov, Akim Tsvigun, Chenxi Whitehouse, Osama Mohammed Afzal, Tarek Mahmoud, Toru Sasaki, Thomas Arnold, Alham Aji, Nizar Habash, Iryna Gurevych, Preslav Nakov
| Challenge: | Large language models generate fluent responses to user queries, but they are also susceptible to misuse in journalism, education, and academia. |
| Approach: | They propose a large-scale benchmark for machine-generated text detection that is a multi-generator, multi-domain, and multi-lingual corpus. |
| Outcome: | The proposed system can detect machine-generated text and pinpoint misuse . the proposed system is based on a large-scale benchmark dataset . |
FAID: Fine-grained AI-generated Text Detection using Multi-task Auxiliary and Multi-level Contrastive Learning (2026.eacl-long)
Copied to clipboard
Minh Ngoc Ta, Dong Cao Van, Duc-Anh Hoang, Minh Le-Anh, Truong Nguyen, My Anh Tran Nguyen, Yuxia Wang, Preslav Nakov, Dinh Viet Sang
| Challenge: | Existing binary detection frameworks for human-written, LLM-generated and human-LLM collaborative texts are challenging . a recent study focused on binary detection, i.e., human vs. LLM, or on fine-grained detection limited to English. |
| Approach: | They propose a fine-grained detection framework to classify text into three categories . they use multilingual datasets and a multi-domain, multi-generator dataset . |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework outperforms baselines on unseen domains and new LLMs. |
HLU: Human Vs LLM Generated Text Detection Dataset for Urdu at Multiple Granularities (2025.coling-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Using large language models (LLMs) to generate human-like text has raised concerns about misuse, especially in low-resource languages like Urdu. |
| Approach: | They propose a dataset that contains documents, paragraphs, and sentences . they conducted human evaluations and automated evaluations . |
| Outcome: | The proposed dataset shows that distinguishing between human and machine-generated text is challenging for both humans and LLMs. |
A Survey on Detection of LLMs-Generated Content (2024.findings-emnlp)
Copied to clipboard
Xianjun Yang, Liangming Pan, Xuandong Zhao, Haifeng Chen, Linda Petzold, William Yang Wang, Wei Cheng
| Challenge: | Recent advances in large language models have led to an increase in synthetic content generation . the ability to detect LLMs-generated content has become of paramount importance . |
| Approach: | They propose to provide a detailed overview of existing detection strategies and benchmarks, scrutinizing their differences and advocating for more adaptable and robust models to enhance detection accuracy. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model will be able to detect human-written content in real time. |
Learning to Rewrite: Generalized LLM-Generated Text Detection (2025.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing detectors for Large Language Models (LLMs) struggle to generalize in open-world settings. |
| Approach: | They propose a framework to detect LLM-generated text with exceptional generalization to unseen domains by reinforcing LLMs’ inherent rewriting tendencies. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework outperforms state-of-the-art detection methods by 23.04% in AUROC, 35.10% for out-of distribution tests, and 48.66% under adversarial attacks. |
Text Fluoroscopy: Detecting LLM-Generated Text through Intrinsic Features (2024.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Large language models (LLMs) have revolutionized the field of natural language processing because of their excellent performance on various tasks. |
| Approach: | They propose a black-box method with better generalizability for detecting LLM-generated text by mining the intrinsic features of the text to be detected. |
| Outcome: | The proposed method achieves 7.36% and 2.84% improvement in detection performance compared to baselines in detecting texts from different domains generated by GPT-4 and Claude3 respectively. |
LLM-as-a-Coauthor: Can Mixed Human-Written and Machine-Generated Text Be Detected? (2024.findings-naacl)
Copied to clipboard
Qihui Zhang, Chujie Gao, Dongping Chen, Yue Huang, Yixin Huang, Zhenyang Sun, Shilin Zhang, Weiye Li, Zhengyan Fu, Yao Wan, Lichao Sun
| Challenge: | Current research focuses on purely MGT detection without adequately addressing mixed scenarios including AI-revised Human-Written Text (HWT) and human-revealed MGT. |
| Approach: | They define mixtext, a form of mixed text involving both AI and human-generated content, and then use a MixSet dataset to assess their effectiveness. |
| Outcome: | The proposed detectors struggle to identify mixtext, particularly in dealing with subtle modifications and style adaptability. |
HACo-Det: A Study Towards Fine-Grained Machine-Generated Text Detection under Human-AI Coauthoring (2025.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing literature focuses on binary, document-level detection, neglecting texts composed jointly by human and LLM contributions. |
| Approach: | They propose to use a dataset to generate human-AI coauthored texts via an automatic pipeline with word-level attribution labels. |
| Outcome: | The proposed method can detect human-AI coauthored texts with a numeric AI ratio. |