mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

DetectGPT-SC: Improving Detection of Text Generated by Large Language Models through Self-Consistency with Masked Predictions

arXiv 2310.14479 ↗First posted 23 Oct 2023cs.CLcited by 6

On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation

Abstract (arXiv)

General large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT have shown remarkable success, but it has also raised concerns among people about the misuse of AI-generated texts. Therefore, an important question is how to detect whether the texts are generated by ChatGPT or by humans. Existing detectors are built on the assumption that there is a distribution gap between human-generated and AI-generated texts. These gaps are typically identified using statistical information or classifiers. In contrast to prior research methods, we find that large language models such as ChatGPT exhibit strong self-consistency in text generation and continuation. Self-consistency capitalizes on the intuition that AI-generated texts can still be reasoned with by large language models using the same logical reasoning when portions of the texts are masked, which differs from human-generated texts. Using this observation, we subsequently proposed a new method for AI-generated texts detection based on self-consistency with masked predictions to determine whether a text is generated by LLMs. This method, which we call DetectGPT-SC. We conducted a series of experiments to evaluate the performance of DetectGPT-SC. In these experiments, we employed various mask scheme, zero-shot, and simple prompt for completing masked texts and self-consistency predictions. The results indicate that DetectGPT-SC outperforms the current state-of-the-art across different tasks.

Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 9 of its 11 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 23 Oct 2023.

Builds on

9 of 11 references.

References · 9

  1. 2022Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Modelscited by 5,601
  2. 2019The Curious Case of Neural Text Degenerationcited by 2,881
  3. 2023DetectGPT: Zero-Shot Machine-Generated Text Detection using Probability Curvaturecited by 705
  4. 2023A Watermark for Large Language Modelscited by 667
  5. 2019Release Strategies and the Social Impacts of Language Modelscited by 505
  6. 2019GLTR: Statistical Detection and Visualization of Generated Textcited by 490
  7. 2023How Close is ChatGPT to Human Experts? Comparison Corpus, Evaluation, and Detectioncited by 472
  8. 2023On the Possibilities of AI-Generated Text Detectioncited by 88
  9. 2023Evade ChatGPT Detectors via A Single Spacecited by 18

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 3; 2025: 2; 2026: 1.

6 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2023Consistency Analysis of ChatGPT
  2. 2025Evaluating the Performance of AI Text Detectors, Few-Shot and Chain-of-Thought Prompting Using DeepSeek Generated Text
  3. 2026READER: Reasoning-Enhanced AI-Generated Text Detection
  4. 2025Stress-testing Machine Generated Text Detection: Shifting Language Models Writing Style to Fool Detectors
  5. 2023A Systematic Study and Comprehensive Evaluation of ChatGPT on Benchmark Datasets
  6. 2023Counter Turing Test CT^2: AI-Generated Text Detection is Not as Easy as You May Think -- Introducing AI Detectability Index
  7. 2026Reasoning-Aware AIGC Detection via Alignment and Reinforcement
  8. 2024Exploring AI Text Generation, Retrieval-Augmented Generation, and Detection Technologies: a Comprehensive Overview