arXiv Machine Learning By Jaee Ponde, Aritra Das, Mihir More, Debayan Gupta

On the Indistinguishability of Human v/s AI Generated Text

Read the original on arXiv Machine Learning →

The paper examines how repeated paraphrasing, guided by human writing samples, can shift machine‑generated text toward the human distribution. In a multi‑sample setting where both human and AI responses are available for the same prompts, the authors demonstrate that iterative paraphrasing converges to the empirical human distribution under simple mixing and stability conditions. They provide an explicit convergence rate, extend the analysis to finite samples, and quantify how many human samples and paraphrasing rounds are needed to achieve a desired error level.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv Machine Learning.

Hugging Face Trending Papers
Aug 27

On the Indistinguishability of Human v/s AI Generated Text

The paper investigates how repeated paraphrasing can make AI-generated text increasingly indistinguishable from human writing. By leveraging human writing samples, the authors show that strategic paraphrasing moves the machine-generated distribution closer to the empirical human distribution under simple mixing and stability conditions. They provide an explicit convergence rate, extend the analysis to finite samples, and quantify how many human samples and paraphrasing rounds are needed to achieve a desired error.

arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 11

Inverse Turing Bench: Evaluating Language Models as Judges of Human vs. AI Dialogue

The paper introduces Inverse Turing Bench, a benchmark designed to assess how well language models can distinguish between human-only and human-AI dialogues in multi-turn text. It provides paired dialogue transcripts and evaluates models on correctly identifying the type of conversation. Preliminary results show GPTZero, Claude Opus-4.6, and GPT-5.5 achieving the highest accuracies of 89.41%, 77.92%, and 75.94% respectively, highlighting both the strengths and limitations of statistical versus semantic detection approaches.

By William Hager, Ishika Rathi, Masum Hasan, Cameron Jones
arXiv AI
Jul 24

Detecting LLM-Generated Tokens in Human--LLM Coauthored Text

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