How You Prompt Matters! Even Task-Oriented Constraints in Instructions Affect LLM-Generated Text Detection
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
To combat the misuse of Large Language Models (LLMs), many recent studies have presented LLM-generated-text detectors with promising performance. When users instruct LLMs to generate texts, the instruction can include different constraints depending on the user's need. However, most recent studies do not cover such diverse instruction patterns when creating datasets for LLM detection. In this paper, we reveal that even task-oriented constraints -- constraints that would naturally be included in an instruction and are not related to detection-evasion -- cause existing powerful detectors to have a large variance in detection performance. We focus on student essay writing as a realistic domain and manually create task-oriented constraints based on several factors for essay quality. Our experiments show that the standard deviation (SD) of current detector performance on texts generated by an instruction with such a constraint is significantly larger (up to an SD of 14.4 F1-score) than that by generating texts multiple times or paraphrasing the instruction. We also observe an overall trend where the constraints can make LLM detection more challenging than without them. Finally, our analysis indicates that the high instruction-following ability of LLMs fosters the large impact of such constraints on detection performance.
Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 45 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 Nov 2023.
Builds on
19 of 45 references.
References · 19
- 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 13,028
- 2023G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignmentcited by 2,276
- 2021Pre-train, Prompt, and Predict: A Systematic Survey of Prompting Methods in Natural Language Processingcited by 2,234
- 2015A Diversity-Promoting Objective Function for Neural Conversation Modelscited by 1,077
- 2019How Can We Know What Language Models Know?cited by 959
- 2023Can Large Language Models Be an Alternative to Human Evaluations?cited by 734
- 2023DetectGPT: Zero-Shot Machine-Generated Text Detection using Probability Curvaturecited by 726
- 2019Release Strategies and the Social Impacts of Language Modelscited by 513
- 2023How Close is ChatGPT to Human Experts? Comparison Corpus, Evaluation, and Detectioncited by 481
- 2023Benchmarking Large Language Models for News Summarizationcited by 445
- 2023Paraphrasing evades detectors of AI-generated text, but retrieval is an effective defensecited by 429
- 2023Can AI-Generated Text be Reliably Detected?cited by 386
7 more
- 2023Prompting Large Language Model for Machine Translation: A Case Studycited by 250
- 2017Learning Discourse-level Diversity for Neural Dialog Models using Conditional Variational Autoencoderscited by 222
- 2023DetectLLM: Leveraging Log Rank Information for Zero-Shot Detection of Machine-Generated Textcited by 210
- 2023The Science of Detecting LLM-Generated Textscited by 128
- 2023ChatGPT or Human? Detect and Explain. Explaining Decisions of Machine Learning Model for Detecting Short ChatGPT-generated Textcited by 85
- 2023OUTFOX: LLM-Generated Essay Detection Through In-Context Learning with Adversarially Generated Examplescited by 80
- 2023ArguGPT: evaluating, understanding and identifying argumentative essays generated by GPT modelscited by 42
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 3; 2025: 4; 2026: 1.
8 papers.
- 2024RAID: A Shared Benchmark for Robust Evaluation of Machine-Generated Text Detectorscited by 163
- 2024Spotting AI's Touch: Identifying LLM-Paraphrased Spans in Textcited by 16
- 2025HACo-Det: A Study Towards Fine-Grained Machine-Generated Text Detection under Human-AI Coauthoringcited by 15
- 2025GenAI Content Detection Task 3: Cross-Domain Machine-Generated Text Detection Challengecited by 7
- 2025How Sampling Affects the Detectability of Machine-written texts: A Comprehensive Studycited by 4
- 2024Investigating the Influence of Prompt-Specific Shortcuts in AI Generated Text Detectioncited by 1
- 2025Balanced Multi-Factor In-Context Learning for Multilingual Large Language Modelscited by 0
- 2026How Much Were You Told? Measuring External Information in Peer Reviewscited by 0
- 2026How Much Were You Told? Measuring External Information in Peer Reviews23 Sep 2026
- 2025How Sampling Affects the Detectability of Machine-written texts: A Comprehensive Study15 Oct 2025
- 2025HACo-Det: A Study Towards Fine-Grained Machine-Generated Text Detection under Human-AI Coauthoring3 Jun 2025
- 2025Balanced Multi-Factor In-Context Learning for Multilingual Large Language Models17 Feb 2025
- 2025GenAI Content Detection Task 3: Cross-Domain Machine-Generated Text Detection Challenge15 Jan 2025
- 2024Investigating the Influence of Prompt-Specific Shortcuts in AI Generated Text Detection24 Jun 2024
- 2024Spotting AI's Touch: Identifying LLM-Paraphrased Spans in Text21 May 2024
- 2024RAID: A Shared Benchmark for Robust Evaluation of Machine-Generated Text Detectors13 May 2024