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 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.
LLMTrace is a new large‑scale bilingual (English and Russian) corpus designed to improve AI‑written text detection. It contains character‑level annotations that enable precise localization of AI‑generated segments, supporting both full‑text binary classification and interval detection tasks. The dataset is built from a diverse set of modern proprietary and open‑source LLMs to address gaps in existing resources, such as outdated models, limited language coverage, and lack of mixed human‑AI authorship data.
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:2606. 00016v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Detecting AI-generated text is becoming increasingly challenging as modern language models approach human-level fluency and can evade detectors that rely on surface statistics or likelihood-based signals.
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.
arXiv:2508. 01656v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: As Large Language Models (LLMs) have reached human-like fluency and coherence, distinguishing machine-generated text (MGT) from human-written content becomes increasingly difficult.
arXiv:2607. 04061v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Distinguishing Large Language Model (LLM) generated text from human writing is a critical and difficult challenge.
arXiv:2606. 04177v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Interpretable linguistic features offer a promising approach for explaining why a given text appears machine-generated, particularly for non-expert users.
The paper investigates training‑free detection of machine‑generated text using spectral analysis. It shows that spectral energy correlates with variance in token probability trajectories and that human writing produces characteristic fluctuations, termed "generative vitality." The authors find that spectral signals are strongest for long, continuous, constrained generations, while shorter or mixed texts require additional confidence‑based metrics.
arXiv:2608.22179v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Membership inference asks whether a text was used to train a language model, whereas AI-generated text detection asks whether it was generated by a lan...
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...