The DOI matches its DataCite record; 28 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
DetectGPT: Zero-Shot Machine-Generated Text Detection using Probability Curvature
Open accessAbstract
The increasing fluency and widespread usage of large language models (LLMs) highlight the desirability of corresponding tools aiding detection of LLM-generated text. In this paper, we identify a property of the structure of an LLM's probability function that is useful for such detection. Specifically, we demonstrate that text sampled from an LLM tends to occupy negative curvature regions of the model's log probability function. Leveraging this observation, we then define a new curvature-based criterion for judging if a passage is generated from a given LLM. This approach, which we call DetectGPT, does not require training a separate classifier, collecting a dataset of real or generated passages, or explicitly watermarking generated text. It uses only log probabilities computed by the model of interest and random perturbations of the passage from another generic pre-trained language model (e.g., T5). We find DetectGPT is more discriminative than existing zero-shot methods for model sample detection, notably improving detection of fake news articles generated by 20B parameter GPT-NeoX from 0.81 AUROC for the strongest zero-shot baseline to 0.95 AUROC for DetectGPT. See https://ericmitchell.ai/detectgpt for code, data, and other project information.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“After paraphrasing, the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curves of zero-shot detectors (Mitchell et al., 2023) drops from 96 . 5% to 25 . 2%.”
From Can AI-Generated Text be Reliably Detected? (2023) · cites this paper as Mitchell et al., 2023
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“In particular, the detector LLM is not given explicit access to information such as perplexity, which in many detection methods is a crucial component (Mitchell et al., 2023;Hans et al., 2024).”
From LLM Evaluators Recognize and Favor Their Own Generations (2024) · cites this paper as Mitchell et al., 2023
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The AUROC scores of DetectGPT (Mitchell et al., 2023) drop from 96 . 5 % (before the attack) to 59 . 8 % (after the attack).”
From Can AI-Generated Text be Reliably Detected? (2023) · cites this paper as Mitchell et al., 2023
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Mireshghallah et al. [110] experimented to test whether other language models can be used to detect machine-generated text from one language model and found out that smaller language models like OPT-125M are better AIGC detectors than large language models like GPTJ-6B.”
From Survey on Plagiarism Detection in Large Language Models: The Impact of ChatGPT and Gemini on Academic Integrity (2024) · cites this paper as [110]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“However, after altering the content using an Automated Paraphrasing tool (APT), the detection rate decreased to 4.6%.”
From Simple techniques to bypass GenAI text detectors: implications for inclusive education (2024) · cites this paper as Mitchell et al. (2023)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Mitchell et al. (2023) identified that DetectGPT correctly detected 70.3% of model-generated sequences from GPT2-XL.”
From Simple techniques to bypass GenAI text detectors: implications for inclusive education (2024) · cites this paper as Mitchell et al. (2023)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“These detectors require retraining when encountering text generated by new LLMs to ensure reliable detection [Mitchell et al., 2023;Chakraborty et al., 2023b].”
From Authorship Attribution in the Era of LLMs: Problems, Methodologies, and Challenges (2025) · cites this paper as Mitchell et al., 2023
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“However, these methods remain limited in their precision and scope.”
From On the Risk of Misinformation Pollution with Large Language Models (2023) · cites this paper as Mitchell et al., 2023
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Mitchell et al. (2023) observe that AI-generated passages tend to lie in negative curvature of log probability of texts.”
From Can AI-Generated Text be Reliably Detected? (2023) · cites this paper as Mitchell et al. (2023)
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The majority of previous research on automatic detection of machine-generated text has focused on binary classification [Jawahar et al., 2020b;Mitchell et al., 2023].”
From Authorship Attribution in the Era of LLMs: Problems, Methodologies, and Challenges (2025) · cites this paper as Mitchell et al., 2023
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“To effectively analyze and classify human-LLM co-authored texts versus those solely authored by humans or LLMs, feature-based methods from the problem of LLM-generated text detection, such as Log-likelihood [Solaiman et al., 2019], GLTR [Gehrmann et al., 2019a], and log-rank [Mitchell et al., 2023], are adapted to this task.”
From Authorship Attribution in the Era of LLMs: Problems, Methodologies, and Challenges (2025) · cites this paper as Mitchell et al., 2023
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Models like DNA-GPT [Yang et al., 2023a] and DetectGPT [Mitchell et al., 2023] utilized the T5 model [Raffel et al., 2020] to simulate scenarios in which humans modify LLMgenerated texts.”
From Authorship Attribution in the Era of LLMs: Problems, Methodologies, and Challenges (2025) · cites this paper as Mitchell et al., 2023
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The publisher hasn’t deposited this paper’s reference list.
Research works printed but not linked: 9
- Brown, T., Mann, B., Ryder, N., Subbiah, M., Kaplan, J. D., Dhariwal, P., Neelakantan, A., Shyam, P., Sastry, G., Askell, A., Agarwal, S., Herbert-Voss, A., Krueger, G., Henighan, T., Child, R., Ramesh, A., Ziegler, D., Wu, J., Winter, C., Hesse, C., Chen, M., Sigler, E., Litwin, M., Gray, S., Chess, B., Clark, J., Berner, C., McCandlish, S., Radford, A., Sutskever, I., and Amodei, D. Language models are few-shot learners. In Larochelle, H., Ranzato, M., Hadsell, R., Balcan, M., and Lin, H. (eds.), Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 33, pp. 1877-1901.
- Curran Asso- ciates, Inc., 2020. URL https://proceedings. neurips.cc/paper/2020/file/ 1457c0d6bfcb4967418bfb8ac142f64a-Paper. pdf.
- Christiano, P. F., Leike, J., Brown, T., Martic, M., Legg, S., and Amodei, D. Deep reinforcement learning from human preferences. In Guyon, I., Luxburg, U. V., Bengio, S., Wallach, H., Fergus, R., Vishwanathan, S., and Garnett, R. (eds.), Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 30.
- Curran Associates, Inc., 2017. URL https://proceedings.neurips. cc/paper_files/paper/2017/file/ d5e2c0adad503c91f91df240d0cd4e49-Paper. pdf.
- Kirchenbauer, J., Geiping, J., Wen, Y., Katz, J., Miers, I., and Goldstein, T. A watermark for large language mod- els, 2023. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2301. 10226.
- Raffel, C., Shazeer, N., Roberts, A., Lee, K., Narang, S., Matena, M., Zhou, Y., Li, W., and Liu, P. J. Ex- ploring the limits of transfer learning with a unified text-to-text transformer. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 21(140):1-67, 2020. URL http://jmlr. org/papers/v21/20-074.html.
- Solaiman, I., Brundage, M., Clark, J., Askell, A., Herbert- Voss, A., Wu, J., Radford, A., and Wang, J. Release strategies and the social impacts of language models, 2019. URL https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/ papers/1908/1908.09203.pdf.
- Zellers, R., Holtzman, A., Rashkin, H., Bisk, Y., Farhadi, A., Roesner, F., and Choi, Y. Defending against neural fake news. In Neural Information Processing Systems, 2019.
- Zhang, S., Roller, S., Goyal, N., Artetxe, M., Chen, M., Chen, S., Dewan, C., Diab, M., Li, X., Lin, X. V., Mi- haylov, T., Ott, M., Shleifer, S., Shuster, K., Simig, D., Koura, P. S., Sridhar, A., Wang, T., and Zettlemoyer, L. Opt: Open pre-trained transformer language mod- els, 2022. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2205. 01068.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–200 of 292
Evaluating the performance and robustness of LLMs in materials science Q&A and property predictions
Wang, H., Li, K., Ramsay, S., Fehlis, Y., Kim, E., & Hattrick-Simpers, J. R. (2025) · Digital Discovery · doi:10.1039/d5dd00090d · Cited by 24
Naing, S. Z. S., & Udomwong, P. (2024) · Data Intelligence · doi:10.1162/dint_a_00250 · Cited by 15
Cheng, H., Sheng, B., Lee, A., Chaudary, V., Atanasov, A. G., Liu, N., Qiu, Y., Wong, T. Y., Tham, Y.-C., & Zheng, Y. (2024) · doi:10.1101/2024.03.25.586710 · Cited by 15
How Reliable Are AI-Generated-Text Detectors? An Assessment Framework Using Evasive Soft Prompts
Kumarage, T., Sheth, P., Moraffah, R., Garland, J., & Liu, H. (2023) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP (Findings of EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.findings-emnlp.94 · Cited by 27
Detecting ChatGPT: A Survey of the State of Detecting ChatGPT-Generated Text
Dhaini, M., Poelman, W., & Erdoğan, E. (2023) · Student Research Workshop .../Proceedings of the Student Research Workshop ... · doi:10.26615/issn.2603-2821.2023_001 · Cited by 19
Mosca, E., Abdalla, M. H. I., Basso, P., Musumeci, M., & Groh, G. (2023) · Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Trustworthy Natural Language Processing (TrustNLP 2023) · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.trustnlp-1.17 · Cited by 14
Chakraborty, M., Tonmoy, S. M. T. I., Zaman, S. M. M., Gautam, S., Kumar, T., Sharma, K., Barman, N. R., Gupta, C., Jain, V., Chadha, A. R., et al. (2023) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.emnlp-main.136 · Cited by 15
The Impact of Large Language Models in Academia: from Writing to Speaking
Geng, M., Chen, C., Wu, Y., Wan, Y., Zhou, P., & Chen, D. (2025) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL (Findings of ACL) · doi:10.18653/v1/2025.findings-acl.987 · Cited by 23
Xu, Z., Xu, R., & Sheng, V. S. (2024) · Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1609/aaai.v38i21.30527 · Cited by 13
Detecting AI-Generated Texts in Cross-Domains
Zhou, Y., & Wang, J. (2024) · ACM Symposium on Document Engineering (DocEng) · doi:10.1145/3685650.3685673 · Cited by 16
MoPe: Model Perturbation based Privacy Attacks on Language Models
Li, M., Wang, J., Wang, J., & Neel, S. (2023) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.emnlp-main.842 · Cited by 25
Artificially Generated Text Fragments Search in Academic Documents
Gritsai, G., Grabovoy, A., Kildyakov, A., & Chekhovich, Y. V. (2023) · Doklady Mathematics · doi:10.1134/s1064562423701211 · Cited by 14
Understanding the effects of human-written paraphrases in LLM-generated text detection
Lau, H. T., & Zubiaga, A. (2025) · Natural Language Processing Journal · doi:10.1016/j.nlp.2025.100151 · Cited by 13
Watermarks in the Sand: Impossibility of Strong Watermarking for Generative Models
Zhang, H., Edelman, B. L., Francati, D., Venturi, D., Ateniese, G., & Barak, B. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2311.04378 · Cited by 12
Ethic wars: student and educator attitudes in the context of ChatGPT
Eken, S. (2024) · ICST Transactions on e-Education and e-Learning · doi:10.4108/eetel.4917 · Cited by 15
Wang, Q., & Li, H. (2025) · Big Data and Cognitive Computing · doi:10.3390/bdcc9030050 · Cited by 13
On the Generalization of Training-based ChatGPT Detection Methods
Xu, H., Ren, J., He, P., Zeng, S., Cui, Y., Liu, A. Y., Liu, H., & Tang, J. (2024) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP (Findings of EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2024.findings-emnlp.424 · Cited by 20
How Reliable Are AI-Generated-Text Detectors? An Assessment Framework Using Evasive Soft Prompts
Kumarage, T., Sheth, P., Moraffah, R., Garland, J., & Liu, H. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2310.05095 · Cited by 11
Bisztray, T., Cherif, B., Dubniczky, R. A., Gruschka, N., Borsos, B., Ferrag, M. A., Kovács, A., Mavroeidis, V., & Tihanyi, N. (2025) · ACM Workshop on Artificial Intelligence and Security (AISec) · doi:10.1145/3733799.3762964 · Cited by 11
A Framework for Detecting AI-Generated Text in Research Publications
Sarzaeim, P., Doshi, A. M., & Mahmoud, Q. H. (2023) · Proceedings of the International Conference on Advanced Technologies · doi:10.58190/icat.2023.28 · Cited by 11
Enhancing the Robustness of AI-Generated Text Detectors: A Survey
Liu, X., Li, Y., & Li, K. (2025) · Mathematics · doi:10.3390/math13132145 · Cited by 10
Li, Q., Zeng, Z., Li, T., & Sun, S. (2024) · Journal of Information Science · doi:10.1177/01655515241281491 · Cited by 11
TreeQuestion: Assessing Conceptual Learning Outcomes with LLM-Generated Multiple-Choice Questions
Cheng, Z., Xu, J., & Jin, H. (2024) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3686970 · Cited by 13
EX-CODE: A Robust and Explainable Model to Detect AI-Generated Code
Bulla, L., Midolo, A., Mongiovì, M., & Tramontana, E. (2024) · Information · doi:10.3390/info15120819 · Cited by 13
An explainable framework for assisting the detection of AI-generated textual content
Yan, S., Wang, Z., & Dobolyi, D. G. (2025) · Decision Support Systems · doi:10.1016/j.dss.2025.114498 · Cited by 12
AI Usage Cards: Responsibly Reporting AI-generated ContentPreprint
Wahle, J. P., Ruas, T., Mohammad, S. M., Meuschke, N., & Gipp, B. (2023) · doi:10.22541/au.168323192.20543041/v1 · Cited by 10
Pudasaini, S., Miralles-Pechuán, L., Lillis, D., & Salvador, M. L. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2407.13105 · Cited by 8
“…as training classifiers, watermarking, and zero-shot approaches, have been developed to detect text generated from LLMs. Based on these approaches, algorithms such as DetectGPT [18], RADAR [19], Ghostbuster [20], GPT-Sentinel [21] amongst others are being developed to identify AI-generated content.”
MethodSTADEE: STAtistics-Based DEEp Detection of Machine Generated Text
Chen, Z., & Liu, H. (2023) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-981-99-4752-2_60 · Cited by 9
Siino, M. (2024) · International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation (SemEval) · doi:10.18653/v1/2024.semeval-1.37 · Cited by 8
Survey for Detecting AI-generated Content
Wang, Y. (2024) · Advances in Engineering Technology Research · doi:10.56028/aetr.11.1.643.2024 · Cited by 8
AIRABIC: Arabic Dataset for Performance Evaluation of AI Detectors
Alshammari, H., & EI-Sayed, A. (2023) · International Conference on Machine Learning and Applications · doi:10.1109/icmla58977.2023.00127 · Cited by 8
(2023) · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3226684/v1 · Cited by 8
AI-generated text boundary detection with RoFTPreprint
Kushnareva, L., Gaintseva, T., Magai, G., Barannikov, S., Abulkhanov, D., Kuznetsov, K., Tulchinskii, E., Piontkovskaya, I., & Nikolenko, S. (2023) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2311.08349 · Cited by 17
Al-shaibani, M. S., & Ahmed, M. (2025) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5350854 · Cited by 10
Where Am I From? Identifying Origin of LLM-generated Content
Li, L., Bai, Y., & Cheng, M. (2024) · Proceedings of the 2024 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/2024.emnlp-main.681 · Cited by 7
An Empirical Study to Evaluate AIGC Detectors on Code Content
Wang, J., Liu, S., Xie, X., & Li, Y. (2024) · IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE) · doi:10.1145/3691620.3695468 · Cited by 7
Pan, H., de Oliveira, E. A., & Mello, R. F. (2025) · International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (LAK) · doi:10.1145/3706468.3706536 · Cited by 7
Authorship Verification in software engineering education
Rios, S., Zhang, Y., & de Oliveira, E. A. (2023) · ASCILITE Publications · doi:10.14742/apubs.2023.559 · Cited by 7
One-GPT: A One-Class Deep Fusion Model for Machine-Generated Text Detection
Corizzo, R., & Leal-Arenas, S. (2023) · IEEE International Conference on Big Data (BigData) · doi:10.1109/bigdata59044.2023.10386674 · Cited by 8
de Oliveira, E. A., Mohoni, M., & Rios, S. (2024) · Communications in computer and information science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-64315-6_7 · Cited by 7
Ayele, A. A., Babakov, N., Bevendorff, J., Casals, X. B., Chulvi, B., Dementieva, D., Elnagar, A., Freitag, D., Fröbe, M., Korenčić, D., et al. (2024) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-71908-0_11 · Cited by 9
HANSEN: Human and AI Spoken Text Benchmark for Authorship Analysis
Tripto, N., Uchendu, A., Le, T., Setzu, M., Giannotti, F., & Lee, D. (2023) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2023 · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.findings-emnlp.916 · Cited by 6
CurveMark: Detecting AI-Generated Text via Probabilistic Curvature and Dynamic Semantic Watermarking
Zhang, Y., Jiang, X., Sun, H., Zhang, Y., & Tong, D. (2025) · Entropy · doi:10.3390/e27080784 · Cited by 6
GPT-4 Attempting to Attack AI-Text Detectors
Nojoud, A., & Yuhao, L. (2024) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-981-96-0348-0_12 · Cited by 7
SEFD: Semantic-Enhanced Framework for Detecting LLM-Generated Text
He, W., Hou, B., Shang, T., Tarzanagh, D. A., Long, Q., & Shen, L. (2024) · IEEE International Conference on Big Data (BigData) · doi:10.1109/bigdata62323.2024.10825110 · Cited by 6
Liu, Z., Xing, W., Jiao, X., Li, C., & Zhu, W. (2025) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-025-13385-z · Cited by 6
Multitask Learning for Authenticity and Authorship Detection
Chhatwal, G. S., & Zhao, J. (2025) · Electronics · doi:10.3390/electronics14061113 · Cited by 6
Stack More LLM’s: Efficient Detection of Machine-Generated Texts via Perplexity Approximation
Gritsai, G., Khabutdinov, I., & Grabovoy, A. (2024) · Doklady Mathematics · doi:10.1134/s1064562424602075 · Cited by 6
A Novel Approach to Automated Detection of AI-Generated Text
Abbas, H. M. (2025) · Journal of Al-Qadisiyah for Computer Science and Mathematics · doi:10.29304/jqcsm.2025.17.11958 · Cited by 6
DEMASQ: Unmasking the ChatGPT Wordsmith
Kumari, K., Pegoraro, A., Fereidooni, H., & Sadeghi, A. (2024) · Network and Distributed System Security Symposium · doi:10.14722/ndss.2024.241190 · Cited by 10
Advances in edge-cloud collaboration and evolution for large-small models
Wang, Y., Shen, T., Zhang, S., Wu, F., Zhao, Z., Cai, H., Lyu, C., Ma, L., Yang, C., & Wu, F. L. (2024) · Journal of Image and Graphics · doi:10.11834/jig.240011 · Cited by 8
BUST: Benchmark for the evaluation of detectors of LLM-Generated Text
Cornelius, J., Lithgow-Serrano, O., Mitrovic, S., Dolamic, L., & Rinaldi, F. (2024) · Proceedings of the 2024 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (Volume 1: Long Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/2024.naacl-long.444 · Cited by 5
Language Models can Evaluate Themselves via Probability Discrepancy
Xia, T., Yu, B., Wu, Y., Chang, Y., & Zhou, C. (2024) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL (Findings of ACL) · doi:10.18653/v1/2024.findings-acl.291 · Cited by 5
Adversarial Math Word Problem Generation
Xie, R., Huang, C., Wang, J., & Dhingra, B. (2024) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP (Findings of EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2024.findings-emnlp.292 · Cited by 15
A Novel Benford’s Law-Driven Approach for Detecting Machine-Generated Text
Wang, Z., Zhang, C., & Ren, M. (2025) · ACM Transactions on Information Systems · doi:10.1145/3748305 · Cited by 6
Cooman, J. D. (2023) · Law Technology and Humans · doi:10.5204/lthj.2787 · Cited by 5
Rojas-Simón, J., Ledeneva, Y. N., & García-Hernández, R. A. (2024) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-62836-8_31 · Cited by 5
Catch Me If You GPT: Tutorial on Deepfake Texts
Uchendu, A., Venkatraman, S., Le, T., & Lee, D. (2024) · Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (NAACL-HLT) · doi:10.18653/v1/2024.naacl-tutorials.1 · Cited by 5
Looking for Traces of Textual Deepfakes in Bulgarian on Social Media
Temnikova, I., Marinova, I., Gargova, S., Margova, R., & Koychev, I. K. (2023) · International conference Recent advances in natural language processing · doi:10.26615/978-954-452-092-2_122 · Cited by 5
Deep dive into language traits of AI-generated Abstracts
Kumar, V., Bharti, A., Verma, D., & Bhatnagar, V. (2024) · Joint International Conference on Data Science & Management of Data (CODS-COMAD) · doi:10.1145/3632410.3632471 · Cited by 5
GigaCheck: Detecting LLM-generated ContentPreprint
Tolstykh, I., Tsybina, A., Yakubson, S., Gordeev, A., Dokholyan, V., & Kuprashevich, M. (2025) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5381590 · Cited by 5
Detecting Artificial Intelligence: A New Cyberarms Race Begins
Campbell, M., & Jovanovic, M. (2023) · Computer · doi:10.1109/mc.2023.3279446 · Cited by 4
Prajapati, M., Baliarsingh, S. K., & Dev, P. P. (2026) · International Journal of Machine Learning and Cybernetics · doi:10.1007/s13042-025-02868-7 · Cited by 4
Comparative evaluation of machine learning methods for protecting LLMs from prompt injection attacks
Dzhaliuk, N., Sabodashko, D., Khoma, V., Khoma, Y., Kolchenko, V., & Podpora, M. (2026) · International Journal of Information Security · doi:10.1007/s10207-026-01264-8 · Cited by 5
Cowap, A., Graham, Y., & Foster, J. (2023) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2023 · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.findings-emnlp.665 · Cited by 4
Generative AI as a Supportive Tool for Scientific Research
Weinberg, A. I. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-46238-2_1 · Cited by 6
A Method for Distinguishing Model Generated Text and Human Written Text
Shimada, H., & Kimura, M. (2024) · Journal of Advances in Information Technology · doi:10.12720/jait.15.6.714-722 · Cited by 4
Xiong, F., Markchom, T., Zheng, Z., Jung, S., Ojha, V., & Liang, H. (2024) · International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation (SemEval) · doi:10.18653/v1/2024.semeval-1.25 · Cited by 8
Gu, R., & Meng, X. (2024) · International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation (SemEval) · doi:10.18653/v1/2024.semeval-1.212 · Cited by 5
A Metric-Based Detection System for Large Language Model Texts
Le, L., & Tran, D. T. (2024) · ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems · doi:10.1145/3704739 · Cited by 4
On the Generalization and Adaptation Ability of Machine-Generated Text Detectors in Academic Writing
Liu, Y., Zhong, Z., Liao, Y., Sun, Z. T., Zheng, J., Wei, J., Gong, Q., Tong, F., Chen, Y., Zhang, Y., et al. (2025) · ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD) · doi:10.1145/3711896.3737408 · Cited by 7
Explainable Multimodal Fake Posts Detection Using Feature Extraction with Attention Mechanisms
Ohkawa, T., Yoshiura, H., & Yamaguchi, T. (2023) · IEEE International Conference on Software Quality, Reliability and Security Companion (QRS-C) · doi:10.1109/qrs-c60940.2023.00068 · Cited by 4
Buz, T., Frost, B., Genchev, N., Schneider, M., Kaffee, L.-A., & de Melo, G. (2024) · Joint Conference on Lexical and Computational Semantics · doi:10.18653/v1/2024.starsem-1.23 · Cited by 4
TextMachina: Seamless Generation of Machine-Generated Text Datasets
Sarvazyan, A. M., González, J. Á., & Franco-Salvador, M. (2024) · Procedia Computer Science · doi:10.1016/j.procs.2024.09.462 · Cited by 4
Advances in Machine Learning & Artificial Intelligence
Akram, A. (2021) · Advances in Machine Learning & Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.33140/amlai · Cited by 4
Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) for Medical Education and TrainingPreprint
Lema, K. G. (2023) · AfricArXiv (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31730/osf.io/xytzm · Cited by 5
GhostCite: A Large-Scale Analysis of Citation Validity in the Age of Large Language Models
Xu, Z., Qiu, Y., Sun, L., Miao, F., Wu, F., Li, X., Wang, X., Lu, H., Zhang, Z., Hu, Y., et al. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2602.06718 · Cited by 3
“Detection efforts have emerged: GPTZero reported hallucinated citations in both ICLR 2026 submissions and NeurIPS 2025 accepted papers [9], [10], while watermarking [32] and zero-shot detection based on probability curvature [33] offer complementary strategies.”
Adversarial Paraphrasing: A Universal Attack for Humanizing AI-Generated Text
Cheng, Y., Sadasivan, V. S., Saberi, M., Saha, S., & Feizi, S. (2025) · Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 38 · doi:10.52202/085713-1588 · Cited by 3
Cheng, Z., Zhou, L., Jiang, F., Wang, B., & Li, H. (2025) · Proceedings of the ACM on Web Conference 2025 · doi:10.1145/3696410.3714770 · Cited by 3
Guo, S., Ju, Y., Chen, X., & Gu, J. (2024) · ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference (DAC) · doi:10.1145/3649329.3656545 · Cited by 3
Laughing Out Loud – Exploring AI-Generated and Human-Generated Humor
Avetisyan, H., Safikhani, P., & Broneske, D. (2023) · International Conference on Soft Computing, Artificial Intelligence and Applications · doi:10.5121/csit.2023.132406 · Cited by 3
A Comparative Study of Classification of Human-Written Text Versus AI-Generated Text
Vashistha, M., Dhiman, I., Singh, P., Kumar, A., & Malhotra, D. (2024) · Lecture notes in electrical engineering · doi:10.1007/978-981-97-3442-9_13 · Cited by 3
Mu, Y., Wu, B. P., Thorne, W., Robinson, A., Αλέτρας, Ν., Scarton, C., Bontcheva, K., & Song, X. (2024) · Language Resources and Evaluation Conference (LREC) · doi:10.63317/577de85vh6cz · Cited by 4
Gameiro, H. D. S. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-54827-7_22 · Cited by 3
Rad, M. H., Farsi, F., Bali, S., Etezadi, R., & Shamsfard, M. (2024) · International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation (SemEval) · doi:10.18653/v1/2024.semeval-1.69 · Cited by 3
Classifying AI-generated summaries And Human Summaries Based on Statistical Features
Mathews, D., Varghese, J. P., & Samuel, L. C. (2024) · International Conference on Trends in Quantum Computing and Emerging Business Technologies (TQCEBT) · doi:10.1109/tqcebt59414.2024.10545131 · Cited by 4
An Empirical Study on Automatically Detecting AI-Generated Source Code: How Far Are We?Preprint
Suh, H., Tafreshipour, M., Li, J., Bhattiprolu, A., & Ahmed, I. (2025) · Qeios · doi:10.32388/sbl97o · Cited by 3
Technical Report on the Pangram AI-Generated Text Classifier
Emi, B., & Spero, M. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2402.14873 · Cited by 2
“Perplexity based methods - such as DetectGPT, Sniffer and DetectLLM - fail on human-written documents that happen to be in the training set of LLMs, such as the Declaration of Independence.”
MethodResultInfluentialA Contrastive Semantic Watermarking Framework for Large Language Models
Wang, J., Chang, X., Xiao, C., & Zhang, L. (2025) · Symmetry · doi:10.3390/sym17071124 · Cited by 2
Nam, N. T. (2025) · Tạp chí Khoa học Trường Đại học Mở Hà Nội · doi:10.59266/houjs.2025.981 · Cited by 2
SHALLOW ANN MODELS TO CLASSIFY UKRAINIAN AI-GENERATED TEXT
Peredrii, O. (2025) · Системи управління навігації та зв’язку Збірник наукових праць · doi:10.26906/sunz.2025.4.108 · Cited by 2
Bendo, M. C. D. (2026) · ASEAN Journal of Open and Distance Learning · doi:10.64233/vyvi9613 · Cited by 2
Large Language Model Authorship in Ophthalmic Publications
Fortenbach, C. R., Wu, Y. S., Mungra, P. M., & Gelder, R. N. V. (2026) · Ophthalmology · doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2026.05.037 · Cited by 2
Sable, R. Y., Baviskar, V., Gupta, S., Pagare, D., Kasliwal, E., Bhosale, D. S., & Jade, P. (2024) · Communications in computer and information science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-56700-1_22 · Cited by 3
Word-Level Interpretation of Chatgpt Detector Based on Classification Contribution
Chen, D. (2023) · Highlights in Science Engineering and Technology · doi:10.54097/hset.v70i.12204 · Cited by 2
Çelikten, T., & Onan, A. (2024) · Computers, materials & continua/Computers, materials & continua (Print) · doi:10.32604/cmc.2024.051574 · Cited by 2
Deep Learning-Driven Multi-Stage Product Visual Emotional Design Utilizing Web Semantics
Chen, X., Wang, J., & Lin, Z. (2024) · International Journal on Semantic Web and Information Systems · doi:10.4018/ijswis.354735 · Cited by 2
A Survey on Writing Style Change Detection: Current Literature and Future Directions
Hashemi, A., & Shi, W. (2025) · Machine Intelligence Research · doi:10.1007/s11633-025-1544-6 · Cited by 2
Black-Box Adversarial Attacks Against Language Model Detector
Ha, H., Tran, D., & Kim, D. (2023) · International Symposium on Information and Communication Technology · doi:10.1145/3628797.3628949 · Cited by 2
Metadata
- Authors
- Mitchell, E., Lee, Y., Khazatsky, A., Manning, C. D., & Finn, C.
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2023
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2301.11305
- OpenAlex
- W4318351452
- Cited by
- 151
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 51 · 2023: 60
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Licence
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Funders
- Canadian Institute for Advanced Research
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Authorship Attribution and Profiling
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Digital Media Forensic Detection
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Keywords
- AI-generated text detection, large language models, zero-shot detection, fake news 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
