PreprintCited by 77Topic ModelingAuthorship Attribution and ProfilingAdversarial Robustness in Machine Learning

Real or Fake? Learning to Discriminate Machine from Human Generated Text

Open access
Bakhtin, Anton, Gross, Sam, Ott, Myle, Deng, Yuntian, Ranzato, Marc'Aurelio, Szlam, Arthur·2019·arXiv

Abstract

Energy-based models (EBMs), a.k.a. un-normalized models, have had recent successes in continuous spaces. However, they have not been successfully applied to model text sequences. While decreasing the energy at training samples is straightforward, mining (negative) samples where the energy should be increased is difficult. In part, this is because standard gradient-based methods are not readily applicable when the input is high-dimensional and discrete. Here, we side-step this issue by generating negatives using pre-trained auto-regressive language models. The EBM then works in the residual of the language model; and is trained to discriminate real text from text generated by the auto-regressive models. We investigate the generalization ability of residual EBMs, a pre-requisite for using them in other applications. We extensively analyze generalization for the task of classifying whether an input is machine or human generated, a natural task given the training loss and how we mine negatives. Overall, we observe that EBMs can generalize remarkably well to changes in the architecture of the generators producing negatives. However, EBMs exhibit more sensitivity to the training set used by such generators.

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

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.1906.03351

Cites

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

Self-check

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

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

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 45 · Cited by 77

Research works printed but not linked: 25

  1. Alexei Baevski and Michael Auli. Adaptive input representations for neural language modeling. In International Conference on Learning Representations , 2019. URL https://openreview. net/forum?id=ByxZX20qFQ .
  2. Ronan Collobert, Jason Weston, Léon Bottou, Michael Karlen, Koray Kavukcuoglu, and Pavel Kuksa. Natural language processing (almost) from scratch. Journal of machine learning research , 12 (Aug):2493-2537, 2011.
  3. Yann N Dauphin, Angela Fan, Michael Auli, and David Grangier. Language modeling with gated convolutional networks. In Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Machine LearningVolume 70 , pp. 933-941. JMLR, 2017.
  4. Yilun Du and Igor Mordatch. Implicit generation and generalization in energy-based models. CoRR , abs/1903.08689, 2019. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/1903.08689 . · arXiv
  5. Yoav Freund and Robert E. Schapire. A decision-theoretic generalization of on-line learning and an application to boosting. Journal of Computer and System Sciences , 55(1):119-139, 1997.
  6. Ian J. Goodfellow, Jean Pouget-Abadie, Mehdi Mirza, Bing Xu, David Warde-Farley, Sherjil Ozair, Aaron Courville, and Yoshua Bengio. Generative adversarial nets. In NIPS , 2014.
  7. A. Graves and J. Schmidhuber. Framewise phoneme classification with bidirectional lstm and other neural network architectures. Neural Networks , 18(5-6):602--610, 2005.
  8. Sepp Hochreiter and Jürgen Schmidhuber. Long short-term memory. Neural Computation , 9(8): 1735--1780, 1997.
  9. John Hopfield. Neural networks and physical systems with emergent collective computational abilities. In National Academy of Sciences of the USA , volume 79, pp. 2554--2558, 1982.
  10. Ryan Kiros, Yukun Zhu, Ruslan Salakhutdinov, Richard S Zemel, Antonio Torralba, Raquel Urtasun, and Sanja Fidler. Skip-thought vectors. arXiv preprint arXiv:1506.06726 , 2015. · arXiv
  11. Ilya Kulikov, Alexander H Miller, Kyunghyun Cho, and Jason Weston. Importance of a search strategy in neural dialogue modelling. arXiv preprint arXiv:1811.00907 , 2018. · arXiv
  12. Yann LeCun, Sumit Chopra, Raia Hadsell, Marc'Aurelio Ranzato, and Fu-Jie Huang. A tutorial on energy-based learning. Predicting Structured Outputs , 2006. MIT Press.
  13. Yinhan Liu, Myle Ott, Naman Goyal, Jingfei Du, Mandar Joshi, Danqi Chen, Omer Levy, Mike Lewis, Luke Zettlemoyer, and Veselin Stoyanov. Roberta: A robustly optimized bert pretraining approach. arXiv preprint arXiv:1907.11692 , 2019. · arXiv
  14. Ilya Loshchilov and Frank Hutter. Sgdr: Stochastic gradient descent with warm restarts. arXiv preprint arXiv:1608.03983 , 2016. · arXiv
  15. Stephen Merity, Caiming Xiong, James Bradbury, and Richard Socher. Pointer sentinel mixture models. arXiv preprint arXiv:1609.07843 , 2016. · arXiv
  16. Myle Ott, Sergey Edunov, Alexei Baevski, Angela Fan, Sam Gross, Nathan Ng, David Grangier, and Michael Auli. fairseq: A fast, extensible toolkit for sequence modeling. In Proceedings of NAACL-HLT 2019: Demonstrations , 2019.
  17. Razvan Pascanu, Tomas Mikolov, and Yoshua Bengio. On the difficulty of training recurrent neural networks. In International conference on machine learning , pp. 1310-1318, 2013.
  18. M. Ranzato, V. Mnih, J. Susskind, and G.E. Hinton. Modeling natural images using gated mrfs. IEEE Trans. Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence , 35(9):2206-2222, 2013.
  19. Marc'Aurelio Ranzato, Y-Lan Boureau, Sumit Chopra, and Yann LeCun. A unified energy-based framework for unsupervised learning. In 11-th International Workshop on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics (AISTATS) , 2007.
  20. Mike Schuster and K. Paliwal Kuldip. Bidirectional recurrent neural networks. Signal Processing, IEEE Transactions on , 45(11):2673-2681, 1997.
  21. Rico Sennrich, Barry Haddow, and Alexandra Birch. Neural machine translation of rare words with subword units. arXiv preprint arXiv:1508.07909 , 2015. · arXiv
  22. Y. W. Teh, M. Welling, S. Osindero, and Hinton G. E. Energy-based models for sparse overcomplete representations. Journal of Machine Learning Research , 4:1235-1260, 2003.
  23. Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N Gomez, Łukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. Attention is all you need. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , pp. 5998-6008, 2017.
  24. P. Viola and M. Jones. Robust real-time object detection. IJCV , 2001.
  25. Max Welling, Michal Rosen-Zvi, and Geoffrey E. Hinton. Exponential family harmoniums with an application to information retrieval. In Neural Information Processing Systems , 2005.

Authors
Bakhtin, A., Gross, S., Ott, M., Deng, Y., Ranzato, M., & Szlam, A.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Meta (United Kingdom) (GB)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2019
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2948975009
Cited by
77
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 3
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Authorship Attribution and Profiling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
Keywords
energy-based models, AI-generated text detection, generalization, text generation

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