The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Efficient Authorship Attribution Method Using Ensemble Models Built by Knowledge Distillation
Abstract
Authorship attribution is a task to identify the author of given documents. It is often treated as a classification task that predicts the author of a written text among given candidates. From practical application perspectives, such as forensic science, the interpretation of results is essential, and the ability to perform authorship attribution with many sentences at high speed will become increasingly important for developing authorship attribution methods. Recently, transformer-based large-scale language models have been developed in natural language processing, and high accuracy has been achieved in various fields. The attention mechanism implemented in the encoder part of the transformer is called self-attention, which calculates the degree of attention given to each word in a sentence. However, in classification problems such as author attribution, the only evidence used as a basis for judgment is the attention distribution, which is a single dimension of the matrix calculated by self-attention and is computationally inefficient. In addition, since this attention distribution is obtained for the number of attentions in the model, its contribution to estimation results and utilization is difficult to examine. In this study, we propose an authorship attribution method that ensembles compact models that substitute each attention of a fine-tuned transformer made by knowledge distillation. We also examine the contribution of each attention to the estimation results based on…
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“To address the substantial computational costs noted in prior studies, they applied distillation techniques (knowledge distillation is discussed later in this section) aimed at reducing overhead-achieving a sixfold speed-upand improving the interpretability of the model's outputs.”
From Generative AI and intellectual property: a systematic literature review of possible issues and mitigations (2026) · cites this paper as Sakurai et al., 2023
In the citing paper
“Sakurai et al. (2023) propose a fine-tuned version of BERT tailored for the author attribution task.”
From Generative AI and intellectual property: a systematic literature review of possible issues and mitigations (2026) · cites this paper as Sakurai et al., 2023
In the citing paper
“For instance, Sakurai et al. (2023) fine-tuned a model using text from eight Japanese authors, achieving 88.4% accuracy.”
From Generative AI and intellectual property: a systematic literature review of possible issues and mitigations (2026) · cites this paper as Sakurai et al. (2023)
In the citing paper
“Consequently, they decomposed BERT into multiple distilled models running in parallel.On 371 texts from the same eight authors, this setup reduced inference time from 20.33 to 3.38 s but decreased accuracy by about 10%.”
From Generative AI and intellectual property: a systematic literature review of possible issues and mitigations (2026) · cites this paper as Sakurai et al. (2023)
Citations
Cites
BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding
Devlin, J., Chang, M.-W., Lee, K., & Toutanova, K. (2018) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1810.04805 · Cited by 73,173
BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding
Devlin, J., Chang, M.-W., Lee, K., & Toutanova, K. (2019) · Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long and Short Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/n19-1423 · Cited by 54,325
DistilBERT, a distilled version of BERT: smaller, faster, cheaper and lighter
Sanh, V., Debut, L., Chaumond, J., & Wolf, T. (2019) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1910.01108 · Cited by 4,653
Research works printed but not linked: 15
- Matsuura, 2000, Authorship detection of sentences by 8 japanese modern authors via n-gram distribution, SIG Technical Reports(NL), 53, 1
- 10.1145/3184558.3191621 · DOI
- Shirai, Author estimation using latent dirichlet allocation, 2
- Smith, 2014, Determining if two documents are written by the same author, Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65, 178, 10.1002/asi.22954 · DOI
- 10.48550/ARXIV.1706.03762 · DOI · Paper page
- Fabien, BertAA : BERT fine-tuning for authorship attribution, 127
- Hinton, Distilling the knowledge in a neural network
- 10.1038/s41598-022-13690-4 · DOI
- Zagoruyko, Paying more attention to attention: Improving the performance of convolutional neural networks via attention transfer
- Maekawa, 2008, Compilation of the kotonoha-bccwj corpus, The Society of Japanese Linguistics, 4, 82
- Loshchilov, Decoupled weight decay regularization
- 10.1145/3546000.3546007 · DOI
- 10.14778/3415478.3415530 · DOI
- Mosbach, On the interplay between fine-tuning and sentence-level probing for linguistic knowledge in pre-trained transformers, 68
- Zhou, 2022, A closer look at how fine-tuning changes BERT, 1046, 10.18653/v1/2022.acl-long.75 · DOI
Cited by
Arnaudo, A., Coppola, R., Morisio, M., Vetrò, A., Borghi, M., Raso, R., & Khan, B. (2026) · PeerJ Computer Science · doi:10.7717/peerj-cs.3928 · Cited by 2
Metadata
- Authors
- Sakurai, W., Asano, M., Imoto, D., Honma, M., & Kurosawa, K.
- Affiliations
- National Research Institute of Police Science,Artificial Intelligence Section,Kashiwa-shi,Japan
- National Research Institute of Police Science,Second Department of Forensic Science,Kashiwa-shi,Japan
- Venue
- 2023 9th International Conference on Computer and Communications (ICCC)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2023-12-08
- Pages
- 2357-2362
- Cited by
- 1
- References
- 3
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.