Limits of Detecting Text Generated by Large-Scale Language Models
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Some consider large-scale language models that can generate long and coherent pieces of text as dangerous, since they may be used in misinformation campaigns. Here we formulate large-scale language model output detection as a hypothesis testing problem to classify text as genuine or generated. We show that error exponents for particular language models are bounded in terms of their perplexity, a standard measure of language generation performance. Under the assumption that human language is stationary and ergodic, the formulation is extended from considering specific language models to considering maximum likelihood language models, among the class of k-order Markov approximations; error probabilities are characterized. Some discussion of incorporating semantic side information is also given.
Key facts. Cited by 15 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 9 Feb 2020.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 1; 2022: 2; 2023: 5; 2024: 2; 2025: 2; 2026: 3.
15 papers.
Sort:
By area:
- 2024Spotting LLMs With Binoculars: Zero-Shot Detection of Machine-Generated Textcited by 263
- 2023On the Reliability of Watermarks for Large Language Modelscited by 189
- 2021TURINGBENCH: A Benchmark Environment for Turing Test in the Age of Neural Text Generationcited by 120
- 2023The Gradient of Generative AI Release: Methods and Considerationscited by 63
- 2022Attribution and Obfuscation of Neural Text Authorship: A Data Mining Perspectivecited by 41
- 2023ParaFuzz: An Interpretability-Driven Technique for Detecting Poisoned Samples in NLPcited by 19
- 2022A Benchmark Corpus for the Detection of Automatically Generated Text in Academic Publicationscited by 18
- 2023Long-form analogies generated by chatGPT lack human-like psycholinguistic propertiescited by 8
- 2025Watermarking Discrete Diffusion Language Modelscited by 5
- 2023Stacking the Odds: Transformer-Based Ensemble for AI-Generated Text Detectioncited by 3
- 2024Benchmarking of LLM Detection: Comparing Two Competing Approachescited by 1
- 2025VietBinoculars: A Zero-Shot Approach for Detecting Vietnamese LLM-Generated Textcited by 1
- 2026On the Indistinguishability of Human v/s AI Generated Text27 Aug 2026
- 2026VietAIDetector: An Open-Source Zero-Shot Detector for Vietnamese AI-Generated Text26 Aug 2026
- 2026Deciding When to Switch: E-Processes for Adaptive Minimax Training for Generative Adversarial Nets10 Aug 2026
- 2025Watermarking Discrete Diffusion Language Models3 Nov 2025
- 2025VietBinoculars: A Zero-Shot Approach for Detecting Vietnamese LLM-Generated Text30 Sep 2025
- 2024Benchmarking of LLM Detection: Comparing Two Competing Approaches17 Jun 2024
- 2024Spotting LLMs With Binoculars: Zero-Shot Detection of Machine-Generated Text22 Jan 2024
- 2023Stacking the Odds: Transformer-Based Ensemble for AI-Generated Text Detection29 Oct 2023
- 2023ParaFuzz: An Interpretability-Driven Technique for Detecting Poisoned Samples in NLP4 Aug 2023
- 2023On the Reliability of Watermarks for Large Language Models7 Jun 2023
- 2023Long-form analogies generated by chatGPT lack human-like psycholinguistic properties7 Jun 2023
- 2023The Gradient of Generative AI Release: Methods and Considerations5 Feb 2023
3 more
- 2022Attribution and Obfuscation of Neural Text Authorship: A Data Mining Perspective19 Oct 2022
- 2022A Benchmark Corpus for the Detection of Automatically Generated Text in Academic Publications4 Feb 2022
- 2021TURINGBENCH: A Benchmark Environment for Turing Test in the Age of Neural Text Generation27 Sep 2021
- 2025Watermarking Discrete Diffusion Language Modelscited by 5
- 2025Watermarking Discrete Diffusion Language Models3 Nov 2025
- 2024Spotting LLMs With Binoculars: Zero-Shot Detection of Machine-Generated Textcited by 263
- 2021TURINGBENCH: A Benchmark Environment for Turing Test in the Age of Neural Text Generationcited by 120
- 2023The Gradient of Generative AI Release: Methods and Considerationscited by 63
- 2022Attribution and Obfuscation of Neural Text Authorship: A Data Mining Perspectivecited by 41
- 2022A Benchmark Corpus for the Detection of Automatically Generated Text in Academic Publicationscited by 18
- 2023Long-form analogies generated by chatGPT lack human-like psycholinguistic propertiescited by 8
- 2023Stacking the Odds: Transformer-Based Ensemble for AI-Generated Text Detectioncited by 3
- 2024Benchmarking of LLM Detection: Comparing Two Competing Approachescited by 1
- 2025VietBinoculars: A Zero-Shot Approach for Detecting Vietnamese LLM-Generated Textcited by 1
- 2026Deciding When to Switch: E-Processes for Adaptive Minimax Training for Generative Adversarial Netscited by 0
- 2026VietAIDetector: An Open-Source Zero-Shot Detector for Vietnamese AI-Generated Textcited by 0
- 2026On the Indistinguishability of Human v/s AI Generated Textcited by 0
- 2026On the Indistinguishability of Human v/s AI Generated Text27 Aug 2026
- 2026VietAIDetector: An Open-Source Zero-Shot Detector for Vietnamese AI-Generated Text26 Aug 2026
- 2026Deciding When to Switch: E-Processes for Adaptive Minimax Training for Generative Adversarial Nets10 Aug 2026
- 2025VietBinoculars: A Zero-Shot Approach for Detecting Vietnamese LLM-Generated Text30 Sep 2025
- 2024Benchmarking of LLM Detection: Comparing Two Competing Approaches17 Jun 2024
- 2024Spotting LLMs With Binoculars: Zero-Shot Detection of Machine-Generated Text22 Jan 2024
- 2023Stacking the Odds: Transformer-Based Ensemble for AI-Generated Text Detection29 Oct 2023
- 2023Long-form analogies generated by chatGPT lack human-like psycholinguistic properties7 Jun 2023
- 2023The Gradient of Generative AI Release: Methods and Considerations5 Feb 2023
- 2022Attribution and Obfuscation of Neural Text Authorship: A Data Mining Perspective19 Oct 2022
- 2022A Benchmark Corpus for the Detection of Automatically Generated Text in Academic Publications4 Feb 2022
- 2021TURINGBENCH: A Benchmark Environment for Turing Test in the Age of Neural Text Generation27 Sep 2021