arXiv:2607. 29539v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Standard AI-text detection benchmarks compare human-written text against text generated directly by large language models (LLMs).
arXiv:2606. 06481v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: As AI writing assistants become increasingly integrated into real-world drafting and revision workflows, many documents are no longer purely human-written or AI-generated, but instead result from progressive human-AI co-editing.
Distinguishing machine-generated text (MGT) from human-written text (HWT) becomes increasingly important due to potential misuse. However, most supervised detectors often degrade out-of-domain (OOD) a...
arXiv:2608. 19746v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Personalized text generation aims to make LLMs write in a specific individual's style, yet existing benchmarks measure task accuracy or preference alignment rather than whether the model's output actually resembles the target author's writing.
The study demonstrates that text produced by large language models (LLMs) leaves a distinct stylometric footprint—primarily increased entropy and lexical diversity—across multiple models and domains. In contrast, AI editing of human text does not replicate this footprint; edited texts show only modest lexical diversity gains and reduced entropy, with lexical density emerging as the key distinguishing feature. Consequently, stylometric analysis can differentiate AI-generated from AI-edited content, but is less effective at distinguishing either from purely human writing.
arXiv:2609.15369v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Word-level detectors identify unedited AI-generated text almost perfectly, but the literature documents their brittleness under rewording, and a word-l...
arXiv:2607. 04061v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Distinguishing Large Language Model (LLM) generated text from human writing is a critical and difficult challenge.
arXiv:2607. 21458v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The rise of human-AI collaborative writing has created a growing need for fine-grained detection methods that support localizing likely LLM-generated content in mixed-authorship documents.
The paper introduces VOLM, a framework that quantifies how much original value a human adds to a document beyond what a language model could generate from a task description alone. Unlike existing tools that focus on stylistic detection, VOLM extracts content at varying granularities, reconstructs it with an LLM, and compares these reconstructions to those derived from the task description. Evaluations across news articles, ICLR peer reviews, and argumentative essays show that VOLM can distinguish human-authored texts from LLM-generated ones while remaining robust to content-preserving transformations.
MultiGhostBench is a multilingual benchmark for authorship attribution of long-form text generated by large language models. It contains 928 books produced by five recent LLMs in six languages and three scripts, each averaging about 59,000 words, and is designed to test attribution methods under domain, author, and language shifts. Experiments show that no single attribution method dominates across all settings, with performance generally dropping under distribution shifts, and that transformer-based detectors retain generator information across languages while statistical and fingerprint-based detectors are more language‑dependent.
MultiGhostBench is a multilingual benchmark for authorship attribution of long‑form text generated by large language models. It contains 928 books produced by five recent LLMs in six languages and three scripts, each averaging about 59,000 words, and is designed to test attribution methods under domain, author, and language shifts. Experiments show that no single attribution method dominates across all settings, with performance generally dropping under distribution shifts, while transformer‑based detectors retain generator information across languages but vary in transfer effectiveness, and statistical/fingerprint detectors are more language‑dependent.
arXiv:2609.37755v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Purpose: Most Greek papyri remain unpublished and undigitised; a handwritten text recognition (HTR) pipeline that transcribes them automatically would...
The paper "Limits of LLM Text Detectors in Education" argues that existing LLM‑generated text detectors assume a binary human/LLM distinction, which fails to capture realistic student‑AI collaboration. It introduces a contribution‑aware evaluation framework with eight student contribution levels and presents GEDE, a benchmark of over 900 human‑written and 12,500 generated essays across 886 tasks. Using GEDE, the authors evaluate four detection methods and find that most detectors perform poorly on intermediate contribution levels, especially LLM‑assisted revisions, raising concerns about false accusations.