Is Human-Like Text Liked by Humans? Multilingual Human Detection and Preference Against AI (2026.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
Yuxia Wang, Rui Xing, Jonibek Mansurov, Giovanni Puccetti, Zhuohan Xie, Minh Ngoc Ta, Jiahui Geng, Jinyan Su, Mervat Abassy, Saadeldine Eletter, Kareem Elozeiri, Nurkhan Laiyk, Maiya Goloburda, Tarek Mahmoud, Raj Vardhan Tomar, Alexander Aziz, Ryuto Koike, Masahiro Kaneko, Artem Shelmanov, Ekaterina Artemova, Vladislav Mikhailov, Akim Tsvigun, Alham Fikri Aji, Nizar Habash, Iryna Gurevych, Preslav Nakov
| Challenge: | Prior studies have shown that distinguishing text generated by Large Language Models from human-written text is challenging for humans and often no better than random guessing. |
| Approach: | They conduct extensive case study to determine the upper bound of human detection accuracy. |
| Outcome: | The findings challenge previous conclusions on human detection accuracy across languages and domains. |
Similar Papers
Automatic Detection of Generated Text is Easiest when Humans are Fooled (2020.acl-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Recent advances in neural language modelling make it possible to rapidly generate vast amounts of human-sounding text. |
| Approach: | They compare decoding methods with popular sampling-based decoding strategies . they show that multi-sentence excerpts can fool expert human raters over 30% of the time . |
| Outcome: | The proposed methods improve with longer excerpt length, but multi-sentence excerpts fool human raters over 30% of the time. |
Can AI-Generated Persuasion Be Detected? Persuaficial Benchmark and AI vs. Human Linguistic Differences (2026.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Large Language Models (LLMs) can generate highly persuasive text, raising concerns about misuse for propaganda, manipulation, and other harmful purposes. |
| Approach: | They propose a multilingual benchmark to compare LLM-generated persuasive texts with human-written ones. |
| Outcome: | The proposed benchmark compares human-authored and LLM-generated persuasive texts . it finds that overtly persuasive LLMs are easier to detect than human-written ones . |
Human Bias in the Face of AI: Examining Human Judgment Against Text Labeled as AI Generated (2025.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Prior research on AI mistrust focused primarily on AI's bias towards different human pop-ups. |
| Approach: | They examine how bias shapes the perception of AI versus human generated content . they found that raters favored content labeled "Human Generated" even when labels were deliberately swapped . |
| Outcome: | The findings highlight the limitations of human judgment in interacting with AI and offer a foundation for improving human-AI collaboration. |
People who frequently use ChatGPT for writing tasks are accurate and robust detectors of AI-generated text (2025.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Qualitative analysis of experts’ free-form explanations shows that while they rely heavily on specific lexical clues (‘AI vocabulary’), they also pick up on more complex phenomena within the text (e.g., formality, originality, clarity). |
| Approach: | They hire annotators to read 300 non-fiction English articles, label them as either human-written or AI-generated, and provide paragraph-length explanations for their decisions. |
| Outcome: | The annotators who frequently use LLMs for writing tasks outperform commercial and open-source detectors even without evasion tactics like paraphrasing and humanization. |
Linguistic and Embedding-Based Profiling of Texts Generated by Humans and Large Language Models (2025.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Recent studies have focused on using LLMs to classify text as either human-written or machine-generated . |
| Approach: | They characterize human-written and machine-generated texts using a set of linguistic features across different linguistic levels such as morphology, syntax, and semantics. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model reveals that human-written texts exhibit simpler syntactic structures and more diverse semantic content. |
Who Writes What: Unveiling the Impact of Author Roles on AI-generated Text Detection (2025.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Large Language Models (LLMs) require accurate text detection, but authors' characteristics are neglected. |
| Approach: | They investigate how author characteristics impact AI-generated text detection . they use corpus of human-authored texts and parallel AI-generated texts . |
| Outcome: | The results show that gender, CEFR proficiency, academic field and language environment influence detector accuracy. |
The (Undesired) Attenuation of Human Biases by Multilinguality (2022.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | odor pleasantness perception is universal, but cultural biases are not always present in embedding models . et al., 2018: a new study shows that cultural bias is not always the case in embedded models based on human texts . |
| Approach: | They propose multilingual cultural aware tests to quantify biases in embedding models . they find that biased models are more likely to be multilingual than monolingual ones . |
| Outcome: | The results show that human preferences are not always universal . they also show that multilinguality reverses biases, despite differences in training corpus . |
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. |
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. |
Can Large Language Models Be an Alternative to Human Evaluations? (2023.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Human evaluation is indispensable for assessing the quality of texts generated by machine learning models or written by humans. |
| Approach: | They propose to use large language models to evaluate unseen texts using the same instructions and samples . they also use LLMs to generate responses to questions that are used to conduct human evaluation . |
| Outcome: | The proposed model can be used to evaluate texts in open-ended story generation and adversarial attacks. |