mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Benchmarking the Detection of LLMs-Generated Modern Chinese Poetry

arXiv 2509.01620 ↗First posted 1 Sep 2025cs.CL cs.AIcited by 10

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The rapid development of advanced large language models (LLMs) has made AI-generated text indistinguishable from human-written text. Previous work on detecting AI-generated text has made effective progress, but has not involved modern Chinese poetry. Due to the distinctive characteristics of modern Chinese poetry, it is difficult to identify whether a poem originated from humans or AI. The proliferation of AI-generated modern Chinese poetry has significantly disrupted the poetry ecosystem. Based on the urgency of identifying AI-generated poetry in the real Chinese world, this paper proposes a novel benchmark for detecting LLMs-generated modern Chinese poetry. We first construct a high-quality dataset, which includes both 800 poems written by six professional poets and 41,600 poems generated by four mainstream LLMs. Subsequently, we conduct systematic performance assessments of six detectors on this dataset. Experimental results demonstrate that current detectors cannot be used as reliable tools to detect modern Chinese poems generated by LLMs. The most difficult poetic features to detect are intrinsic qualities, especially style. The detection results verify the effectiveness and necessity of our proposed benchmark. Our work lays a foundation for future detection of AI-generated poetry.

Key facts. Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 65 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 Sep 2025.

Builds on

19 of 65 references.

References · 19

  1. 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,372
  2. 2019Release Strategies and the Social Impacts of Language Modelscited by 513
  3. 2019GLTR: Statistical Detection and Visualization of Generated Textcited by 496
  4. 2024Spotting LLMs With Binoculars: Zero-Shot Detection of Machine-Generated Textcited by 263
  5. 2023Self-Consuming Generative Models Go MADcited by 250
  6. 2023DetectLLM: Leveraging Log Rank Information for Zero-Shot Detection of Machine-Generated Textcited by 210
  7. 2022Human heuristics for AI-generated language are flawedcited by 105
  8. 2023Is ChatGPT a Highly Fluent Grammatical Error Correction System? A Comprehensive Evaluationcited by 97
  9. 2023How to Design Translation Prompts for ChatGPT: An Empirical Studycited by 31
  10. 2024Who Wrote This? The Key to Zero-Shot LLM-Generated Text Detection Is GECScorecited by 27
  11. 2025RepreGuard: Detecting LLM-Generated Text by Revealing Hidden Representation Patternscited by 24
  12. 2023Does Human Collaboration Enhance the Accuracy of Identifying LLM-Generated Deepfake Texts?cited by 21
7 more
  1. 2020Introducing Aspects of Creativity in Automatic Poetry Generationcited by 14
  2. 2024What is the Best Way for ChatGPT to Translate Poetry?cited by 14
  3. 2025Leveraging Explainable AI for LLM Text Attribution: Differentiating Human-Written and Multiple LLMs-Generated Textcited by 11
  4. 2023The Imitation Game: Detecting Human and AI-Generated Texts in the Era of ChatGPT and BARDcited by 9
  5. 2025Characterizing Bias: Benchmarking Large Language Models in Simplified versus Traditional Chinesecited by 7
  6. 2024LLMCL-GEC: Advancing Grammatical Error Correction with LLM-Driven Curriculum Learningcited by 5
  7. 2024FOCUS: Forging Originality through Contrastive Use in Self-Plagiarism for Language Modelscited by 3

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 2; 2026: 8.

10 papers.