Cited by 49Misinformation and Its ImpactsTopic ModelingNatural Language Processing Techniques

Disinformation Capabilities of Large Language Models

Open access
Vykopal, Ivan, Pikuliak, Matúš, Srba, Ivan, Moro, Robert, Macko, Dominik, Bielikova, Maria·2024·Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers)

Abstract

Ivan Vykopal, Matúš Pikuliak, Ivan Srba, Robert Moro, Dominik Macko, Maria Bielikova. Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers). 2024.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.18653/v1/2024.acl-long.793

Cites

0 citation errors · 1 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Existing detection methods are mostly binary classifiers and cannot distinguish complex LLM-generated content such as mixed human-LLM input.

    “current methods often focus on binary classification, failing to address the complexities of realworld scenarios like human-LLM collaboration.”

    From Beyond Binary: Towards Fine-Grained LLM-Generated Text Detection via Role Recognition and Involvement Measurement (2025) · cites this paper as [55]

    The Detection methodology (page unavailable in our copy) says that all detectors evaluated in this study are binary classifiers. Section 7 describes testing them on fully LLM-generated and human-written articles, but the paper does not establish that current methods generally fail on mixed human–LLM content or human–LLM collaboration. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

The publisher hasn’t deposited this paper’s reference list.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Tom Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, Melanie Subbiah, Jared D Kaplan, Prafulla Dhariwal, Arvind Neelakantan, Pranav Shyam, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, et al. 2020. Language models are few-shot learners. Advances in neural information processing systems, 33:1877-1901.
  2. Ben Buchanan, Andrew Lohn, Micah Musser, and Kate- rina Sedova. 2021. Truth, lies, and automation. Cen- ter for Security and Emerging Technology, 1(1):2.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Vykopal, I., Pikuliak, M., Srba, I., Moro, R., Macko, D., & Bielikova, M.
Affiliations
  • Brno University of Technology (CZ)
  • Kempelen Institute of Intelligent Technologies (SK)
Venue
Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers)
Published
2024
Pages
14830-14847
ISSN
0736-587X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4402684203
Cited by
34
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 6
FWCI
44.51
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Proceedings of the conference - Association for Computational Linguistics. Meeting (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Funders
  • European Commission (101070093, 311070AKF2, 101079164, 101073921)
  • HORIZON EUROPE Framework Programme
  • European Regional Development Fund (311070AKF2)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
Keywords
disinformation, large language models, misinformation detection

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