mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

GenAI Content Detection Task 3: Cross-Domain Machine-Generated Text Detection Challenge

arXiv 2501.08913 ↗First posted 15 Jan 2025cs.CL cs.LGcited by 7

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Recently there have been many shared tasks targeting the detection of generated text from Large Language Models (LLMs). However, these shared tasks tend to focus either on cases where text is limited to one particular domain or cases where text can be from many domains, some of which may not be seen during test time. In this shared task, using the newly released RAID benchmark, we aim to answer whether or not models can detect generated text from a large, yet fixed, number of domains and LLMs, all of which are seen during training. Over the course of three months, our task was attempted by 9 teams with 23 detector submissions. We find that multiple participants were able to obtain accuracies of over 99% on machine-generated text from RAID while maintaining a 5% False Positive Rate -- suggesting that detectors are able to robustly detect text from many domains and models simultaneously. We discuss potential interpretations of this result and provide directions for future research.

Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 23 of its 42 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 Jan 2025.

Builds on

23 of 42 references.

References · 23

  1. 2015Domain-Adversarial Training of Neural Networkscited by 3,044
  2. 2019Release Strategies and the Social Impacts of Language Modelscited by 513
  3. 2019GLTR: Statistical Detection and Visualization of Generated Textcited by 496
  4. 2023Paraphrasing evades detectors of AI-generated text, but retrieval is an effective defensecited by 429
  5. 2023Can AI-Generated Text be Reliably Detected?cited by 386
  6. 2018Black-box Generation of Adversarial Text Sequences to Evade Deep Learning Classifierscited by 345
  7. 2024Spotting LLMs With Binoculars: Zero-Shot Detection of Machine-Generated Textcited by 263
  8. 2023RADAR: Robust AI-Text Detection via Adversarial Learningcited by 190
  9. 2023GPT detectors are biased against non-native English writerscited by 178
  10. 2024RAID: A Shared Benchmark for Robust Evaluation of Machine-Generated Text Detectorscited by 163
  11. 2023MAGE: Machine-generated Text Detection in the Wildcited by 132
  12. 2023AI model GPT-3 (dis)informs us better than humanscited by 78
11 more
  1. 2022Real or Fake Text?: Investigating Human Ability to Detect Boundaries Between Human-Written and Machine-Generated Textcited by 63
  2. 2023ChatGPT and a New Academic Reality: Artificial Intelligence-Written Research Papers and the Ethics of the Large Language Models in Scholarly Publishingcited by 52
  3. 2020RoFT: A Tool for Evaluating Human Detection of Machine-Generated Textcited by 36
  4. 2023Overview of AuTexTification at IberLEF 2023: Detection and Attribution of Machine-Generated Text in Multiple Domainscited by 31
  5. 2024SemEval-2024 Task 8: Multidomain, Multimodel and Multilingual Machine-Generated Text Detectioncited by 30
  6. 2023Evade ChatGPT Detectors via A Single Spacecited by 18
  7. 2023Mutation-Based Adversarial Attacks on Neural Text Detectorscited by 9
  8. 2023How You Prompt Matters! Even Task-Oriented Constraints in Instructions Affect LLM-Generated Text Detectioncited by 8
  9. 2024GenAI Content Detection Task 2: AI vs. Human -- Academic Essay Authenticity Challengecited by 6
  10. 2023Talking Abortion (Mis)information with ChatGPT on TikTokcited by 4
  11. 2024RKadiyala at SemEval-2024 Task 8: Black-Box Word-Level Text Boundary Detection in Partially Machine Generated Textscited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 6; 2026: 1.

7 papers.