# Monitoring AI-Modified Content at Scale: A Case Study on the Impact of ChatGPT on AI Conference Peer Reviews

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.07183 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.07183/

## Key facts

- Cited by 164 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 45 of its 85 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 11 Mar 2024.

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 45)

- [Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformer](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.10683/) (2019)
- [RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approach](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1907.11692/) (2019)
- [DetectGPT: Zero-Shot Machine-Generated Text Detection using Probability Curvature](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2301.11305/) (2023)
- [A Watermark for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2301.10226/) (2023)
- [Defending Against Neural Fake News](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1905.12616/) (2019)
- [Release Strategies and the Social Impacts of Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1908.09203/) (2019)
- [GLTR: Statistical Detection and Visualization of Generated Text](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1906.04043/) (2019)
- [Can AI-Generated Text be Reliably Detected?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.11156/) (2023)
- [Robust Distortion-free Watermarks for Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.15593/) (2023)
- [Provable Robust Watermarking for AI-Generated Text](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.17439/) (2023)
- [All That's 'Human' Is Not Gold: Evaluating Human Evaluation of Generated Text](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.00061/) (2021)
- [Fast-DetectGPT: Efficient Zero-Shot Detection of Machine-Generated Text via Conditional Probability Curvature](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.05130/) (2023)
- [Automatic Detection of Generated Text is Easiest when Humans are Fooled](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1911.00650/) (2019)
- [The Unlocking Spell on Base LLMs: Rethinking Alignment via In-Context Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.01552/) (2023)
- [Assessing Cross-Cultural Alignment between ChatGPT and Human Societies: An Empirical Study](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.17466/) (2023)
- [Can large language models provide useful feedback on research papers? A large-scale empirical analysis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.01783/) (2023)
- [RADAR: Robust AI-Text Detection via Adversarial Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.03838/) (2023)
- [GPT detectors are biased against non-native English writers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.02819/) (2023)
- [Automatic Detection of Machine Generated Text: A Critical Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2011.01314/) (2020)
- [Having Beer after Prayer? Measuring Cultural Bias in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14456/) (2023)
- [Probing Pre-Trained Language Models for Cross-Cultural Differences in Values](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.13722/) (2022)
- [DNA-GPT: Divergent N-Gram Analysis for Training-Free Detection of GPT-Generated Text](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.17359/) (2023)
- [ReviewerGPT? An Exploratory Study on Using Large Language Models for Paper Reviewing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.00622/) (2023)
- [TweepFake: about Detecting Deepfake Tweets](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2008.00036/) (2020)
- [Intrinsic Dimension Estimation for Robust Detection of AI-Generated Texts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.04723/) (2023)
- [A Semantic Invariant Robust Watermark for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.06356/) (2023)
- [Unbiased Watermark for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.10669/) (2023)
- [Algorithmic Monoculture and Social Welfare](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2101.05853/) (2021)
- [Real or Fake? Learning to Discriminate Machine from Human Generated Text](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1906.03351/) (2019)
- [Picking on the Same Person: Does Algorithmic Monoculture lead to Outcome Homogenization?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.13972/) (2022)

## Built on by (most cited first, 30 of 164)

- [Mapping the Increasing Use of LLMs in Scientific Papers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.01268/) (2024)
- [Is A Picture Worth A Thousand Words? Delving Into Spatial Reasoning for Vision Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.14852/) (2024)
- [DeepReview: Improving LLM-based Paper Review with Human-like Deep Thinking Process](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.08569/) (2025)
- [A Comprehensive Survey of Scientific Large Language Models and Their Applications in Scientific Discovery](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.10833/) (2024)
- [AgentReview: Exploring Peer Review Dynamics with LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.12708/) (2024)
- [Delving into LLM-assisted writing in biomedical publications through excess vocabulary](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.07016/) (2024)
- [On the Algorithmic Bias of Aligning Large Language Models with RLHF: Preference Collapse and Matching Regularization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.16455/) (2024)
- [Do LLMs write like humans? Variation in grammatical and rhetorical styles](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.16107/) (2024)
- [Large language models for automated scholarly paper review: A survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.10326/) (2025)
- [Game-theoretic LLM: Agent Workflow for Negotiation Games](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.05990/) (2024)
- [The Widespread Adoption of Large Language Model-Assisted Writing Across Society](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.09747/) (2025)
- [Can LLM feedback enhance review quality? A randomized study of 20K reviews at ICLR 2025](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.09737/) (2025)
- [Detection and Measurement of Syntactic Templates in Generated Text](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.00211/) (2024)
- [Position: The AI Conference Peer Review Crisis Demands Author Feedback and Reviewer Rewards](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.04966/) (2025)
- [Conv-Basis: A New Paradigm for Efficient Attention Inference and Gradient Computation in Transformers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.05219/) (2024)
- [Training Tensor Attention Efficiently: From Cubic to Almost Linear Time](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.16411/) (2024)
- [Is ChatGPT Transforming Academics' Writing Style?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.08627/) (2024)
- [On Behalf of the Stakeholders: Trends in NLP Model Interpretability in the Era of LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.19200/) (2024)
- [Prototypical Human-AI Collaboration Behaviors from LLM-Assisted Writing in the Wild](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.16023/) (2025)
- [Is Your Paper Being Reviewed by an LLM? Benchmarking AI Text Detection in Peer Review](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.19614/) (2025)
- [Is Your Paper Being Reviewed by an LLM? Investigating AI Text Detectability in Peer Review](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.03019/) (2024)
- [Detecting LLM-Generated Peer Reviews](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.15772/) (2025)
- [Do Large Language Models Have an English Accent? Evaluating and Improving the Naturalness of Multilingual LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.15956/) (2024)
- [LLM-Generated Fake News Induces Truth Decay in News Ecosystem: A Case Study on Neural News Recommendation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.20013/) (2025)
- [When Your Reviewer is an LLM: Biases, Divergence, and Prompt Injection Risks in Peer Review](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.09912/) (2025)
- [AI-Assisted Peer Review at Scale: The AAAI-26 AI Review Pilot](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.13940/) (2026)
- [The Impact of Large Language Models in Academia: from Writing to Speaking](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.13686/) (2024)
- [AIGS: Generating Science from AI-Powered Automated Falsification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.11910/) (2024)
- [Usefulness of LLMs as an Author Checklist Assistant for Scientific Papers: NeurIPS'24 Experiment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.03417/) (2024)
- [The Good, the Bad and the Constructive: Automatically Measuring Peer Review's Utility for Authors](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.04484/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

We present an approach for estimating the fraction of text in a large corpus which is likely to be substantially modified or produced by a large language model (LLM). Our maximum likelihood model leverages expert-written and AI-generated reference texts to accurately and efficiently examine real-world LLM-use at the corpus level. We apply this approach to a case study of scientific peer review in AI conferences that took place after the release of ChatGPT: ICLR 2024, NeurIPS 2023, CoRL 2023 and EMNLP 2023. Our results suggest that between 6.5% and 16.9% of text submitted as peer reviews to these conferences could have been substantially modified by LLMs, i.e. beyond spell-checking or minor writing updates. The circumstances in which generated text occurs offer insight into user behavior: the estimated fraction of LLM-generated text is higher in reviews which report lower confidence, were submitted close to the deadline, and from reviewers who are less likely to respond to author rebuttals. We also observe corpus-level trends in generated text which may be too subtle to detect at the individual level, and discuss the implications of such trends on peer review. We call for future interdisciplinary work to examine how LLM use is changing our information and knowledge practices.