mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Who Said That? Benchmarking Social Media AI Detection

arXiv 2310.08240 ↗First posted 12 Oct 2023cs.CLcited by 9

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

AI-generated text has proliferated across various online platforms, offering both transformative prospects and posing significant risks related to misinformation and manipulation. Addressing these challenges, this paper introduces SAID (Social media AI Detection), a novel benchmark developed to assess AI-text detection models' capabilities in real social media platforms. It incorporates real AI-generate text from popular social media platforms like Zhihu and Quora. Unlike existing benchmarks, SAID deals with content that reflects the sophisticated strategies employed by real AI users on the Internet which may evade detection or gain visibility, providing a more realistic and challenging evaluation landscape. A notable finding of our study, based on the Zhihu dataset, reveals that annotators can distinguish between AI-generated and human-generated texts with an average accuracy rate of 96.5%. This finding necessitates a re-evaluation of human capability in recognizing AI-generated text in today's widely AI-influenced environment. Furthermore, we present a new user-oriented AI-text detection challenge focusing on the practicality and effectiveness of identifying AI-generated text based on user information and multiple responses. The experimental results demonstrate that conducting detection tasks on actual social media platforms proves to be more challenging compared to traditional simulated AI-text detection, resulting in a decreased accuracy. On the other hand, user-oriented AI-generated text detection significantly improve the accuracy of detection.

Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 20 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 12 Oct 2023.

Builds on

17 of 20 references.

References · 17

  1. 2021TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human Falsehoodscited by 2,919
  2. 2022Survey of Hallucination in Natural Language Generationcited by 2,056
  3. 2018Don't Give Me the Details, Just the Summary! Topic-Aware Convolutional Neural Networks for Extreme Summarizationcited by 1,308
  4. 2022Red Teaming Language Models with Language Modelscited by 983
  5. 2023Whose Opinions Do Language Models Reflect?cited by 759
  6. 2023DetectGPT: Zero-Shot Machine-Generated Text Detection using Probability Curvaturecited by 705
  7. 2019Release Strategies and the Social Impacts of Language Modelscited by 505
  8. 2023How Close is ChatGPT to Human Experts? Comparison Corpus, Evaluation, and Detectioncited by 472
  9. 2023Paraphrasing evades detectors of AI-generated text, but retrieval is an effective defensecited by 401
  10. 2023Can AI-Generated Text be Reliably Detected?cited by 372
  11. 2023Multi-step Jailbreaking Privacy Attacks on ChatGPTcited by 320
  12. 2023Analyzing Leakage of Personally Identifiable Information in Language Modelscited by 278
5 more
  1. 2020TweepFake: about Detecting Deepfake Tweetscited by 117
  2. 2023Intrinsic Dimension Estimation for Robust Detection of AI-Generated Textscited by 111
  3. 2023Multiscale Positive-Unlabeled Detection of AI-Generated Textscited by 59
  4. 2023A Pathway Towards Responsible AI Generated Contentcited by 38
  5. 2023Evade ChatGPT Detectors via A Single Spacecited by 18

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2023: 1; 2024: 5; 2025: 3.

9 papers.