The paper introduces a multi-granularity framework for detecting AI involvement in code, distinguishing human-written from AI-generated or modified files and localizing the specific lines or blocks. It uses a frozen code language model with low-rank adapters trained on machine- and human-written data, producing per-token log-likelihood ratios that feed lightweight heads for line, block, and file-level predictions. Evaluated on thousands of mixed-authorship files, the method achieves high macro F1 scores and maintains low false-positive rates on real human code.
By Yue Xu, Xiyang Wang, Hui Liu, Bolei He
arXiv:2606. 12620v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Thanks to the rapid adoption of AI code assistants powered by large language models (LLMs), industry codebases are, increasingly, a hybrid of AI- and human-authored code.
By Luke Patterson, Li Wang, Adam Faulkner
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.
By Sondos Mahmoud Bsharat, Jiacheng Liu, Xiaohan Zhao, Tianjun Yao, Xinyi Shang, Yi Tang, Jiacheng Cui, Ahmed Elhagry, Salwa K. Al Khatib, Hao Li, Salman Khan, Zhiqiang Shen
The paper argues that current AI‑text detection methods, which estimate human contribution by measuring how predictive a user’s prompt is of the final text, can be easily manipulated. By introducing SPECIFICITY PADDING—adding random IDs to the prompt—the authors show that a title‑only request can appear far more human than one containing the article’s key ideas, and that scores can swing dramatically when the evaluator’s view of the prompt is altered. Across a range of large language models, the same documents can be scored as 85 % human or 15 % human depending solely on the prompt used, revealing a fundamental limitation of likelihood‑based metrics for reliably measuring human authorship.
whyItMatters":"The study demonstrates that likelihood‑based scores cannot reliably establish human contribution without additional evidence of what the person added and how the text was produced."
By Hasan Amin, Zhuoran Lu, Ming Yin
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.
By Yangjun Lu, Hongyi Zhou, Fabian Spill, Kai Ye, Chengchun Shi, Jin Zhu
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. Existing methods for detecting LLM-generated text mainly focus on document-level classification and cannot identify which parts of the text are generated by LLMs.
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).
By Gaetano Perrone, Simon Pietro Romano
arXiv:2608. 05179v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents are increasingly used across the scientific research lifecycle: ideation, literature search, experiment design and execution, analysis, manuscript drafting, and review.
By Tianyu Ding, Aditya Nannapaneni, Bingfan Liu, Ling Zhang
arXiv:2609.06771v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Authorship signals matter in settings where writing style carries identity: digital forensics, plagiarism analysis, account linking, misinformation i...
By MaoXun Huang, Zhenxing Zhang, Claire Cardie
The study investigates whether AI assistance leaves a temporal fingerprint in writing and programming tasks. By analyzing keystroke-level data from three corpora, the authors find that AI contributions appear in distinct bursts and that temporal patterns can almost perfectly distinguish wholesale delegation from authentic work, though ordinary collaboration remains hard to detect. The research suggests that process visibility could serve as a basis for academic integrity checks.
By Eduardo Davalos, Yike Zhang
arXiv:2603.15034v2 Announce Type: replace-cross
Abstract: This paper replicates and extends the system used in the AuTexTification shared task for authorship attribution of machine-generated texts. E...
By Adam Skurla, Dominik Macko, Jakub Simko
Generative AI coding agents are entering the open-source supply chain, yet their diverse and often invisible traces leave their prevalence poorly understood. We introduce a multi-layered detection framework that integrates configuration-file scanning, commit-message analysis, author-identity matching, and bot-signature lookup across World of Code (180M+ Git repositories), classifying agent traces into four behavioral types.