Cited by 24Academic integrity and plagiarismAuthorship Attribution and ProfilingArtificial Intelligence in Education

Beyond Black Box AI generated Plagiarism Detection: From Sentence to Document Level

Open access
Quidwai, Ali, Li, Chunhui, Dube, Parijat·2023·Proceedings of the 18th Workshop on Innovative Use of NLP for Building Educational Applications (BEA 2023)

Abstract

The increasing reliance on large language models (LLMs) in academic writing has led to a rise in plagiarism.Existing AI-generated text classifiers have limited accuracy and often produce false positives.We propose a novel approach using natural language processing (NLP) techniques, offering quantifiable metrics at both sentence and document levels for easier interpretation by human evaluators.Our method employs a multi-faceted approach, generating multiple paraphrased versions of a given question and inputting them into the LLM to generate answers.By using a contrastive loss function based on cosine similarity, we match generated sentences with those from the student's response.Our approach achieves up to 94% accuracy in classifying human and AI text, providing a robust and adaptable solution for plagiarism detection in academic settings.This method improves with LLM advancements, reducing the need for new model training or reconfiguration, and offers a more transparent way of evaluating and detecting AI-generated text.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.18653/v1/2023.bea-1.58

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • these plagiarism tools (particularly the application from Turnitin) have a problem with false positives (i.e. mistakenly identifying human-generated writing as AI-generated), particularly with writing produced by non-native speakers of English and members of Equity-Deserving Groups.

    “Additionally, they also have a problem with false positives (i.e. mistakenly identifying human-generated writing as AI-generated), particularly with writing produced by non-native speakers of English and members of Equity-Deserving Groups (Chechitelli, 2023; Quidwai et al., 2023).”
  • Quidwai, Li, and Dube (2023) analyzes sentences from LLM-generated texts and their paraphrases, distinguishing them from human-written texts by calculating cosine similarity, achieving an accuracy of up to 94%.

    “(Quidwai, Li, and Dube 2023) analyzes sentences from LLM-generated texts and their paraphrases, distinguishing them from human-written texts by calculating cosine similarity, achieving an accuracy of up to 94%.”

    From A Survey on LLM-Generated Text Detection: Necessity, Methods, and Future Directions (2025) · cites this paper as Quidwai, Li, and Dube 2023

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Quidwai, A., Li, C., & Dube, P.
Affiliations
  • New York University (US)
  • Columbia University (US)
  • IBM (United States) (US)
Corresponding author
Dube, Parijat
Venue
Proceedings of the 18th Workshop on Innovative Use of NLP for Building Educational Applications (BEA 2023)
Published
2023
Pages
727-735
OpenAlex
W4385565281
Cited by
24
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 2
FWCI
6.01
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
Workshop on Innovative Use of NLP for Building Educational Applications (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Academic integrity and plagiarism
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Authorship Attribution and Profiling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
Keywords
AI-generated text detection, plagiarism detection, large language models, academic writing, paraphrase generation, contrastive learning, cosine similarity, human vs AI text classification

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