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 201–292 of 292
ALISON: Fast and Effective Stylometric Authorship Obfuscation
Xing, E. P., Venkatraman, S., Le, T., & Lee, D. (2024) · Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1609/aaai.v38i17.29901 · Cited by 10
Divergent LLM Adoption and Heterogeneous Convergence Paths in Research Writing *Preprint
Zhu, W., & Cong, L. (2025) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5170513 · Cited by 2
A widely used Generative-AI detector yields zero false positives
Gosling, S. D., Ybarra, K., & Angulo, S. K. (2024) · Aloma: Revista de Psicologia, Ciències de l'Educació i de l'Esport · doi:10.51698/aloma.2024.42.2.31-43 · Cited by 1
“Solutions are already focusing on so-called zero-shot detection methods that do not require labeled training data (e.g., Mitchell et al., 2023); those that can detect AI-generation in ever-smaller units of text, such as sentences (e.g., Wang et al., 2023); and those that generalize successfully…”
Qu, X., & Meng, X. (2024) · International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation (SemEval) · doi:10.18653/v1/2024.semeval-1.102 · Cited by 2
Ruiz, M. J. U. (2024) · Catalan Journal of Communication & Cultural Studies · doi:10.1386/cjcs_00106_7 · Cited by 2
Hybrid NLP and Machine Learning Framework for Detecting Human and AI-Written Texts
Haritha, M. B. (2025) · International Journal for Research in Applied Science and Engineering Technology · doi:10.22214/ijraset.2025.69630 · Cited by 1
IMPROVING DETECTION OF AI-GENERATED TEXT IN EDUCATION
Antipova, K., & Горбань, Г. В. (2025) · Izdevniecība “Baltija Publishing” eBooks · doi:10.30525/978-9934-26-562-4-1 · Cited by 1
B4: A Black-Box Scrubbing Attack on LLM Watermarks
Huang, B., Xiao, P., & Wan, X. (2025) · Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (NAACL-HLT) · doi:10.18653/v1/2025.naacl-long.460 · Cited by 4
CDUP: Detecting AI Generated Code Using Abstract Syntax Tree Analyst
Păuleț, Ș., & Moruz, A. (2025) · Procedia Computer Science · doi:10.1016/j.procs.2025.09.329 · Cited by 1
Using AI to control AI-assisted plagiarism in L2 writing: a critical review of the literature
Ibrahim, K. H. S. (2026) · Language Testing in Asia · doi:10.1186/s40468-026-00433-9 · Cited by 1
LoRAD: Low-Resource AI-Generated Text Detection with XLM-RoBERTa
Zain, A. (2026) · Workshop on NLP for Languages Using Arabic Script (AbjadNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2026.abjadnlp-1.57 · Cited by 1
BAID: A Benchmark for Bias Assessment of AI Detectors
Basu, P., Zhang, Y., & Raheja, V. (2026) · Workshop on Customizable NLP: Progress and Challenges in Customizing NLP for a Domain, Application, Group, or Individual (CustomNLP4U) · doi:10.18653/v1/2026.customnlp4u-1.1 · Cited by 1
False Positive Risk in AI Detection of L2 Academic Writing: A Case Study
Za’rour, R., & Altakhaineh, A. R. M. (2026) · Discourses on Culture · doi:10.2478/doc-2026-0003 · Cited by 2
Argasiński, J. K., Grabska-Gradzińska, I., Przystalski, K., Ochab, J. K., & Walkowiak, T. (2024) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-63775-9_20 · Cited by 2
Rasheed, A. F., & Zarkoosh, M. (2024) · International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation (SemEval) · doi:10.18653/v1/2024.semeval-1.10 · Cited by 1
Research on Detecting ChatGPT Rewritten Text
Wang, Z., Li, D., & Jin, X. (2024) · doi:10.1109/ictech63197.2024.00092 · Cited by 1
Falconer, J. (2024) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4754610 · Cited by 1
Estupinan-Villegas, G. (2024) · doi:10.31235/osf.io/de75c · Cited by 1
Phantom References: Hallucinated Citations That Survive Peer Review at Top-Tier Conferences
Russinovich, M., Kumar, R. S. S., & Salem, A. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2607.00738 · Cited by 4
“…whether a statement is supported by its source [25], evaluating verifiability in generative search engines [26], and training models to emit inline citations grounded in retrieved evidence [27], [28], on the foundation of automated fact verification [29] and alongside AI-text detection [30], [31].”
Giới thiệu về DetectGPT – Công cụ phát hiện văn bản do máy tính tạo ra
Nam, L. H. (2023) · Tạp chí điện tử Khoa học và Công nghệ Giao thông · doi:10.58845/jstt.utt.2023.vn.3.45-54
PaperMill Detection in Scientific Content
Razis, G., Anagnostopoulos, K., Metaxas, O., Stefanidis, S.-D., Zhou, H. G., & Anagnostopoulos, I. E. (2023) · International Workshop on Semantic and Social Media Adaptation and Personalization (SMAP) · doi:10.1109/smap59435.2023.10255173
Erkennungsverfahren für KI-generierte Texte: Überblick und Architekturentwurf
Pröhl, T., Mohrhardt, R., Förster, N., Putzier, E., & Zarnekow, R. (2024) · HMD Praxis der Wirtschaftsinformatik · doi:10.1365/s40702-024-01051-w · Cited by 1
A Sentence-Semantic-Based Watermark for Large Language Models Against Paraphrasing AttacksPreprint
Wang, H., Zhao, L., Lyu, X., Gao, L., Song, J., & Shen, H. T. (2024) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4774832
AI and Productivity: The Impact of ChatGPT's Release on BloggingPreprint
Kaisen, J., Li, M., & Lu, S. (2024) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4858507
Wu, M. (2024) · Advances in humanities and modern education research; · doi:10.70114/ahmer.2024.1.1.p18
Deloitte at #SMM4H 2024: Can GPT-4 Detect COVID-19 Tweets Annotated by Itself?
Abburi, H., Pudota, N., Veeramani, B., Bowen, E., & Bhattacharya, S. (2024) · Social Media Mining for Health Research and Applications Workshop and Shared Tasks (SMM4H) · doi:10.18653/v1/2024.smm4h-1.18
On Text Granularity and Metric Frameworks for Large Language Model Content Detection
Le, L., & Tran, D. T. (2024) · IEEE International Conference on Big Data (BigData) · doi:10.1109/bigdata62323.2024.10825505
Assessing the accuracy of large language models in extracting latest cricket information
Wickramasinghe, I. (2025) · Scientific Journal of Sport and Performance · doi:10.55860/gslz8291
Divergent LLM Adoption and Heterogeneous Convergence Paths in Research Writing *Preprint
Zhu, W. Y., & Cong, L. (2025) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5216300
Unveiling the Source: Differentiating Human and Machine-Generated Texts in a Multilingual Setting
Chhatwal, G. S., & Zhao, J. (2024) · IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology (WI-IAT) · doi:10.1109/wi-iat62293.2024.00029
Assessing the impact of AI-generated product names on e-commerce performance
Bratus, O. (2025) · System research and information technologies · doi:10.20535/srit.2308-8893.2025.1.10
Deepfake Text Detection Using Deep Convolutional Neural Networks with Explainable AiPreprint
Sadiq, S., & Ullah, S. (2025) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5265122
Bhattacharyya, S., Gupta, P., Niranjan Kumar, M., & Roy, B. (2025) · Workshop on Speech, Vision, and Language Technologies for Dravidian Languages (DravidianLangTech) · doi:10.18653/v1/2025.dravidianlangtech-1.79
Robustness Analysis of Maryland Watermark to Paraphrasing Attacks Under Advanced Techniques
Kumar, R. (2025) · Asian Journal of Computer Science Engineering · doi:10.22377/ajcse.v10i2.213
A General Method for Detecting Information Generated by Large Language ModelsPreprint
Mao, M., Wei, D., Fang, X., & Chau, M. (2025) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5309665 · Cited by 1
Петришак, Т., & Rybchak, Z. (2025) · Таврійський науковий вісник Серія Технічні науки · doi:10.32782/tnv-tech.2025.2.15
Evaluating the Accuracy of AI Content DetectorsPreprint
YILDIZ, F. E., Karaarslan, E., & Aydın, Ö. (2025) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5364392
Detecting Large Language Model Generated Korean Essays Using Curriculum LearningPreprint
Jung, Y., & Oh, H. (2025) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5380275
A Machine Learning Framework for Discriminating between ChatGPT and Web Search Results
Iqbal, M. S., Kashem, M. A., & Chowdhury, M. A. (2025) · Statistics Optimization & Information Computing · doi:10.19139/soic-2310-5070-2338 · Cited by 1
MedAID-ML: A Multilingual Dataset of Biomedical Texts for Detecting AI-Generated Content
Styll, P., Llanos, L. C., Fernández-García, J., & Segura-Bédmar, I. (2025) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-04354-2_5
AUTOMATED DETECTION OF TEXT GENERATED BY LARGE LANGUAGE MODELS
Antipova, K. (2025) · Scientific and Practical Journal "Materials of Scientific Conferences of the Petro Mohyla Black Sea National University" · doi:10.34132/mspc2025.01.14.01
Detecting Machine-Generated Text in the Wild via a Hybrid Semantic-Statistical Model
Liang, P., Chen, L., & Zhang, D. (2025) · Proceedings/Proceedings of the ... International Conference on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering · doi:10.18293/seke2025-132
Detecting Machine‐Generated Text in the Wild via a Hybrid Semantic‐Statistical Model
Liang, P., Chen, L., & Zhang, D. (2025) · doi:10.18293/jvlc2025-063
GenDetect-GAN: generative adversarial network model for machine-generated text detection
Xu, B., Yu, W., Wen, Q., Cui, Q., & Qi, J. (2025) · Applied Intelligence · doi:10.1007/s10489-025-06898-0
Salnikov, E., & Bonch-Osmolovskaya, A. (2025) · Journal of language and Education · doi:10.17323/jle.2025.22211
LIN, X., & Ma, H. (2025) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-7638610/v1
MAGENTA+: Detection of Arabic Machine-Generated Text Across Domains
Houmaine, A., & Rosso, P. (2026) · Lecture notes in networks and systems · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-03695-7_41
Detecting AI Assistance in Abstract Complex Tasks
King, T., Gurney, N., Miller, J. H., & Ustun, V. (2026) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-13187-4_11 · Cited by 1
Prompt Recovery for Misinformation Detection at FIRE 2025
Mehta, P., Hegde, A., Shahi, G. K., Satapara, S., Modha, S., Ganguly, D., Nandini, D., Shashirekha, H. L., Jaiswal, A. K., Pasi, G., et al. (2025) · Annual Meeting of the Forum for Information Retrieval Evaluation (FIRE) · doi:10.1145/3777867.3778261
Jailbreak-as-a-Service: The Emerging Threat LandscapePreprint
Pathade, C., Dhiman, V., & Ahmad, S. (2026) · doi:10.36227/techrxiv.176834604.40419489/v1
Assessing the Prevalence of AI-Generated Content in Leading Runet News Media
Vasilev, A. M., & Николаевна, Т. Г. (2026) · Litera · doi:10.25136/2409-8698.2026.1.77791
On the Robustness of LLM-Generated Text Detection Against Instruction Diversity
Koike, R., Kaneko, M., & Okazaki, N. (2026) · Journal of Natural Language Processing · doi:10.5715/jnlp.33.158
Utterance-level Detection Framework for LLM-Involved Content Detection in Conversational Setting
Zhou, M., & Rui, H. (2026) · Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.18653/v1/2026.eacl-long.63
Khamis, A. K. (2026) · Workshop on NLP for Languages Using Arabic Script (AbjadNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2026.abjadnlp-1.44
Alaktif, A., Chergui, M., Ammoumou, A., & Gmira, F. (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/407609
Liu, X. R., Wang, S., Li, Y., & Li, K. (2026) · Intelligent Data Analysis · doi:10.1177/1088467x261441866
Content authenticity detection using bidirectional LSTM networks
Santhosh, U. D. V., & Duvvuri, S. K. (2026) · Global Journal of Engineering and Technology Advances · doi:10.30574/gjeta.2026.27.1.0093
Evaluating AI Detection Performance Across Writing Modalities in Engineering Interaction
Lestari, M. W., Ginting, A., Aminuddin, H., Cholish, C., & Hasnita, U. (2026) · Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA · doi:10.29303/jppipa.v12i4.9637
PARAPHRASING AS EVASION MECHANISM AGAINST AI-GENERATED TEXT DETECTORS
Antipova, K. A., & Раленко, В. С. (2026) · Izdevniecība “Baltija Publishing” eBooks · doi:10.30525/978-9934-26-651-5-2
Transformer-Based Hybrid Ensemble Approach for Generative AI Authorship Verification
Ravi, N. R., Abhishek, A., Archana, K., Raghuveer, C. S. S., & Thanush, S. (2026) · Information systems engineering and management · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-23544-2_16
AI-Generated Text Detector for Arabic Language: Survey and Remarks
Salem, H., Elkhateb, A. G., Zafar, M. N., Mazzara, M., Al-Atyat, Y. K., & Hattab, S. (2026) · Lecture notes on data engineering and communications technologies · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-23341-7_16
Topa, S. A. (2026) · International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science · doi:10.47772/ijriss.2026.100500277
Detecting and Visualizing LLM Usage in Students' Essays Leveraging Past Assignments and LLM Answers
Zhao, Y., Lueder, R., Zhang, Q., & Starner, T. E. (2026) · ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale (L@S) · doi:10.1145/3774398.3811559
Authentiscore: A Comparative Study of Fine-Tuned Transformers for AI Text Detection
Enaha, C. A., Abdellahi, D., Ahmed, E. T., Nanne, A., & Bakhta, A. (2026) · Lecture notes in networks and systems · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-22032-5_16
WaveDetect: Robust Framework for Machine-Generated Text Detection via Wavelet Transform
Liu, Z., Qin, K., He, L., & Xu, Y. (2026) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL (Findings of ACL) · doi:10.18653/v1/2026.findings-acl.424
Chandrasekar, S., S, V. R., & Vijayalakshmi, P. (2026) · International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation (SemEval) · doi:10.18653/v1/2026.semeval-1.264
Zero-Shot Detection of LLM-Generated Text using Temperature Sensitivity
Ma, S., Li, J., Mao, Z., & Wang, Q. (2026) · Proceedings of the conference - Association for Computational Linguistics. Meeting · doi:10.18653/v1/2026.acl-long.1748 · Cited by 2
PERPLEXITY-BASED AI-GENERATED TEXT CLASSIFICATION IN UKRAINIAN USING SMALL LANGUAGE MODELS
Gorokhovatskyi, O. (2026) · Advanced Information Systems · doi:10.20998/2522-9052.2026.3.01
Agha, A., & Anwar, E. (2026) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-10164745/v1
¿Es posible reconocer el origen robótico de textos mediante conocimiento lingüístico?
Cesteros, A. M. F. (2026) · Linred: Lingüística en la Red · doi:10.37536/linred.2025.xxii.3250
Statistical and Machine Learning Methods for Detecting AI-Generated Content in Gen AI Systems
Kumar, K. P., Soumya, E., & Mani, J. (2026) · Advances in computational intelligence and robotics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-2600-0368-8.ch008
Rani, A., & Suman, M. (2026) · International Journal of Scientific Research in Computer Science Engineering and Information Technology · doi:10.32628/cseit2612410
Prajapati, M., Baliarsingh, S. K., & Ramasubbareddy, S. (2026) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-026-64104-8
Vulnerability of Fake News Detectors under Flagship LLM Laundering
Mehdiyev, J. (2026) · Republican Scientific-Practical Conference "Actual Problems of Cybersecurity and Digital Forensics" · doi:10.25045/forensic.gov.2026.17
Combining probabilistic features and semantic features for AI-Generated text detection
Yu, Y., & Gao, W. (2026) · International Journal of Scientific Research and Management (IJSRM) · doi:10.18535/ijsrm/v14i09.ec01
生成AIの適切な活用を促すメタ認知レポートの評価モデル開発 -プロンプトとAI回答の改善過程の言語化を通して-
K.M.Tanaka, H. (2026) · Institutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB)
Structural and Linguistic Markers for Distinguishing Human Manuscripts from AI-Generated Summaries
Pichappan, P. (2026) · Journal of Digital Information Management · doi:10.6025/jdim/2026/24/3/127-148
Tüker, M., Sınecen, M., & Mehmet Taha, E. S. E. R. (2026) · Scientific journal of Mehmet Akif Ersoy University. · doi:10.70030/sjmakeu.2033004
HybridDetect: Detecting Partial AI Contamination in Student Essays via Multi-Class Classification
Dan, D., & Nakayama, M. (2026) · Annals of Computer Science and Information Systems · doi:10.15439/2026f3512
Füzesi, I., Lengyel, P., & Pancsira, J. (2026) · International Review of Applied Sciences and Engineering · doi:10.1556/1848.2026.01535
Жерченко, С. О., & Візір, М. О. (2026) · doi:10.70286/isu-30.09.2026
Multi-level Text Feature Analysis for Detecting AI-Generated Content
Yan, L., Ye, H., Pan, T., & Ihnaini, B. (2026) · Communications in computer and information science · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-28457-0_9
Nurislom, A. (2026) · Eurasian Journal of Mathematical Theory and Computer Sciences · doi:10.70413/ejmtcs-v06-i10-s92242
Zero-Shot Detection of AI-Generated Bulgarian Text via Binoculars Framework
Petrova, Y. A., & Blajev, N. (2026) · International Conference Computational Linguistics in Bulgaria (CLIB) · doi:10.47810/clib.26.06
DisGAR: Machine Generated Text Detection via Disentangled Generative Artifact Representation
Ma, S., Li, B., Zhang, L., He, Y., Niu, B., & Li, F. (2026) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP (Findings of EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/2026.findings-emnlp.1997
An Empirical Study of the Non-determinism of ChatGPT in Code Generation
Ouyang, S., Zhang, J. M., Harman, M., & Wang, M. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2308.02828
EditLens: Quantifying the Extent of AI Editing in Text
Thai, K., Emi, B., Masrour, E., & Iyyer, M. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.03154 · Cited by 3
“DetectGPT (Mitchell et al., 2023), FastDetect-GPT (Bao et al., 2024), DNA-GPT (Yang & Cheng, 2024), and Binoculars (Hans et al., 2024) are training-free approaches that leverage statistical properties of AI-generated text to perform binary detection.”
Towards Automatic Boundary Detection for Human-AI Collaborative Hybrid Essay in Education
Zeng, Z., Sha, L., Li, Y., Yang, K., Gašević, D., & Chen, G. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2307.12267 · Cited by 25
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
