Measuring Human Involvement in AI-Generated Text: A Case Study on Academic Writing
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Content creation has dramatically progressed with the rapid advancement of large language models like ChatGPT and Claude. While this progress has greatly enhanced various aspects of life and work, it has also negatively affected certain areas of society. A recent survey revealed that nearly 30% of college students use generative AI to help write academic papers and reports. Most countermeasures treat the detection of AI-generated text as a binary classification task and thus lack robustness. This approach overlooks human involvement in the generation of content even though human-machine collaboration is becoming mainstream. Besides generating entire texts, people may use machines to complete or revise texts. Such human involvement varies case by case, which makes binary classification a less than satisfactory approach. We refer to this situation as participation detection obfuscation. We propose using BERTScore as a metric to measure human involvement in the generation process and a multi-task RoBERTa-based regressor trained on a token classification task to address this problem. To evaluate the effectiveness of this approach, we simulated academic-based scenarios and created a continuous dataset reflecting various levels of human involvement. All of the existing detectors we examined failed to detect the level of human involvement on this dataset. Our method, however, succeeded (F1 score of 0.9423 and a regressor mean squared error of 0.004). Moreover, it demonstrated some generalizability across generative models. Our code is available at https://github.com/gyc-nii/CAS-CS-and-dual-head-detector
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 25 of its 31 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 Jun 2025.
Builds on
25 of 31 references.
References · 25
- 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
- 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,132
- 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,266
- 2019BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTcited by 5,462
- 2021SimCSE: Simple Contrastive Learning of Sentence Embeddingscited by 2,168
- 2023DetectGPT: Zero-Shot Machine-Generated Text Detection using Probability Curvaturecited by 705
- 2019Release Strategies and the Social Impacts of Language Modelscited by 505
- 2023How Close is ChatGPT to Human Experts? Comparison Corpus, Evaluation, and Detectioncited by 472
- 2021ConSERT: A Contrastive Framework for Self-Supervised Sentence Representation Transfercited by 231
- 2024Security and Privacy Challenges of Large Language Models: A Surveycited by 179
- 2023Ghostbuster: Detecting Text Ghostwritten by Large Language Modelscited by 90
- 2024Raidar: geneRative AI Detection viA Rewritingcited by 51
13 more
- 2023ArguGPT: evaluating, understanding and identifying argumentative essays generated by GPT modelscited by 41
- 2023GPT-Sentinel: Distinguishing Human and ChatGPT Generated Contentcited by 40
- 2023CHEAT: A Large-scale Dataset for Detecting ChatGPT-writtEn AbsTractscited by 39
- 2023Origin Tracing and Detecting of LLMscited by 39
- 2023A Comprehensive AI Policy Education Framework for University Teaching and Learningcited by 34
- 2023ChatGPT: Applications, Opportunities, and Threatscited by 28
- 2023On the Detectability of ChatGPT Content: Benchmarking, Methodology, and Evaluation through the Lens of Academic Writingcited by 26
- 2021Unsupervised and Distributional Detection of Machine-Generated Textcited by 23
- 2022Dual Contrastive Learning: Text Classification via Label-Aware Data Augmentationcited by 22
- 2023Classification of Human- and AI-Generated Texts: Investigating Features for ChatGPTcited by 18
- 2023Implementing BERT and fine-tuned RobertA to detect AI generated news by ChatGPTcited by 13
- 2023Detection of ChatGPT Fake Science with the xFakeSci Learning Algorithmcited by 6
- 2024Enhancing Robustness of LLM-Synthetic Text Detectors for Academic Writing: A Comprehensive Analysiscited by 4
Built on by
Not cited yet.