mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

A Benchmark Corpus for the Detection of Automatically Generated Text in Academic Publications

arXiv 2202.02013 ↗First posted 4 Feb 2022cs.CLcited by 18

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Automatic text generation based on neural language models has achieved performance levels that make the generated text almost indistinguishable from those written by humans. Despite the value that text generation can have in various applications, it can also be employed for malicious tasks. The diffusion of such practices represent a threat to the quality of academic publishing. To address these problems, we propose in this paper two datasets comprised of artificially generated research content: a completely synthetic dataset and a partial text substitution dataset. In the first case, the content is completely generated by the GPT-2 model after a short prompt extracted from original papers. The partial or hybrid dataset is created by replacing several sentences of abstracts with sentences that are generated by the Arxiv-NLP model. We evaluate the quality of the datasets comparing the generated texts to aligned original texts using fluency metrics such as BLEU and ROUGE. The more natural the artificial texts seem, the more difficult they are to detect and the better is the benchmark. We also evaluate the difficulty of the task of distinguishing original from generated text by using state-of-the-art classification models.

Key facts. Cited by 18 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 26 of its 54 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 Feb 2022.

Builds on

26 of 54 references.

References · 26

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 59,932
  2. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
  3. 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,266
  4. 2019BART: Denoising Sequence-to-Sequence Pre-training for Natural Language Generation, Translation, and Comprehensioncited by 5,874
  5. 2019DistilBERT, a distilled version of BERT: smaller, faster, cheaper and lightercited by 4,243
  6. 2019XLNet: Generalized Autoregressive Pretraining for Language Understandingcited by 2,801
  7. 2019Transformer-XL: Attentive Language Models Beyond a Fixed-Length Contextcited by 1,830
  8. 2016Enriching Word Vectors with Subword Informationcited by 1,578
  9. 2019Cross-lingual Language Model Pretrainingcited by 1,088
  10. 2019Defending Against Neural Fake Newscited by 553
  11. 2019Release Strategies and the Social Impacts of Language Modelscited by 505
  12. 2019GLTR: Statistical Detection and Visualization of Generated Textcited by 490
14 more
  1. 2021All That's 'Human' Is Not Gold: Evaluating Human Evaluation of Generated Textcited by 287
  2. 2019Automatic Detection of Generated Text is Easiest when Humans are Fooledcited by 260
  3. 2020Automatic Detection of Machine Generated Text: A Critical Surveycited by 160
  4. 2017Automatic Detection of Fake Newscited by 145
  5. 2020TweepFake: about Detecting Deepfake Tweetscited by 117
  6. 2019Real or Fake? Learning to Discriminate Machine from Human Generated Textcited by 98
  7. 2020ReviewRobot: Explainable Paper Review Generation based on Knowledge Synthesiscited by 53
  8. 2019Generating Sentiment-Preserving Fake Online Reviews Using Neural Language Models and Their Human- and Machine-based Detectioncited by 50
  9. 2019PaperRobot: Incremental Draft Generation of Scientific Ideascited by 37
  10. 2020Attacking Neural Text Detectorscited by 37
  11. 2020RoFT: A Tool for Evaluating Human Detection of Machine-Generated Textcited by 36
  12. 2020Limits of Detecting Text Generated by Large-Scale Language Modelscited by 15
  13. 2015Comparing the writing style of real and artificial paperscited by 5
  14. 2020Fake News Detection with Different Modelscited by 3

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2022: 5; 2023: 4; 2024: 6; 2025: 3.

18 papers.

Sort:

  1. 2023Testing of Detection Tools for AI-Generated Textcited by 86
  2. 2022Attribution and Obfuscation of Neural Text Authorship: A Data Mining Perspectivecited by 40
  3. 2022Findings of the The RuATD Shared Task 2022 on Artificial Text Detection in Russiancited by 29
  4. 2024Beemo: Benchmark of Expert-edited Machine-generated Outputscited by 26
  5. 2024Authorship Obfuscation in Multilingual Machine-Generated Text Detectioncited by 19
  6. 2023A Simple yet Efficient Ensemble Approach for AI-generated Text Detectioncited by 12
  7. 2022SynSciPass: detecting appropriate uses of scientific text generationcited by 10
  8. 2024A Survey on Responsible Generative AI: What to Generate and What Notcited by 8
  9. 2022Deepfake: Definitions, Performance Metrics and Standards, Datasets and Benchmarks, and a Meta-Reviewcited by 6
  10. 2023Algorithmic Ghost in the Research Shell: Large Language Models and Academic Knowledge Creation in Management Researchcited by 6
  11. 2024Enhancing Robustness of LLM-Synthetic Text Detectors for Academic Writing: A Comprehensive Analysiscited by 4
  12. 2025How Sampling Affects the Detectability of Machine-written texts: A Comprehensive Studycited by 4
6 more
  1. 2024MOSAIC: Multiple Observers Spotting AI Contentcited by 3
  2. 2025On the Detectability of LLM-Generated Text: What Exactly Is LLM-Generated Text?cited by 3
  3. 2022Synthetic Text Detection: Systemic Literature Reviewcited by 2
  4. 2023An Ensemble Method Based on the Combination of Transformers with Convolutional Neural Networks to Detect Artificially Generated Textcited by 2
  5. 2024Uncertain Boundaries: Multidisciplinary Approaches to Copyright Issues in Generative AIcited by 1
  6. 2025Span-level Detection of AI-generated Scientific Text via Contrastive Learning and Structural Calibrationcited by 0