CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 10Authorship Attribution and ProfilingDigital Media Forensic DetectionAdversarial Robustness in Machine Learning

Origin Tracing and Detecting of LLMs

Open access
Li, Linyang, Wang, Pengyu, Ren, Ke, Sun, Tianxiang, Qiu, Xipeng·2023·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2304.14072arXiv 2304.14072
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The extraordinary performance of large language models (LLMs) heightens the importance of detecting whether the context is generated by an AI system. More importantly, while more and more companies and institutions release their LLMs, the origin can be hard to trace. Since LLMs are heading towards the time of AGI, similar to the origin tracing in anthropology, it is of great importance to trace the origin of LLMs. In this paper, we first raise the concern of the origin tracing of LLMs and propose an effective method to trace and detect AI-generated contexts. We introduce a novel algorithm that leverages the contrastive features between LLMs and extracts model-wise features to trace the text origins. Our proposed method works under both white-box and black-box settings therefore can be widely generalized to detect various LLMs.(e.g. can be generalized to detect GPT-3 models without the GPT-3 models). Also, our proposed method requires only limited data compared with the supervised learning methods and can be extended to trace new-coming model origins. We construct extensive experiments to examine whether we can trace the origins of given texts. We provide valuable observations based on the experimental results, such as the difficulty level of AI origin tracing, and the AI origin similarities, and call for ethical concerns of LLM providers. We are releasing all codes and data as a toolkit and benchmark for future AI origin tracing and detecting studies. \footnote{We are releasing all available resource at \url{https://github.com/OpenLMLab/}.}

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2304.14072

Cites

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?

  • When faced with a new LLM, only Sniffer's linear classifier needs retraining to transfer to the new model.

    “When faced with a new LLM, only a linear classifier needs to be retrained to transfer to the new model.”

    From Enhancing the Robustness of AI-Generated Text Detectors: A Survey (2025) · cites this paper as [64]

Cites

Still being checked.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Li, L., Wang, P., Ren, K., Sun, T., & Qiu, X.
Affiliations
Fudan University (CN)
ORCID
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2023
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2304.14072
arXiv
2304.14072
OpenAlex
W4367365810
Cited by
8
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
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 › Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
Keywords
large language models, AI-generated text detection, contrastive features

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