mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

PADBen: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Evaluating AI Text Detectors Against Paraphrase Attacks

arXiv 2511.00416 ↗First posted 1 Nov 2025cs.CL cs.AIcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

While AI-generated text (AIGT) detectors achieve over 90% accuracy on direct LLM outputs, they fail catastrophically against iteratively-paraphrased content. We investigate why iteratively-paraphrased text -- itself AI-generated -- evades detection systems designed for AIGT identification. Through intrinsic mechanism analysis, we reveal that iterative paraphrasing creates an intermediate laundering region characterized by semantic displacement with preserved generation patterns, which brings up two attack categories: paraphrasing human-authored text (authorship obfuscation) and paraphrasing LLM-generated text (plagiarism evasion). To address these vulnerabilities, we introduce PADBen, the first benchmark systematically evaluating detector robustness against both paraphrase attack scenarios. PADBen comprises a five-type text taxonomy capturing the full trajectory from original content to deeply laundered text, and five progressive detection tasks across sentence-pair and single-sentence challenges. We evaluate 11 state-of-the-art detectors, revealing critical asymmetry: detectors successfully identify the plagiarism evasion problem but fail for the case of authorship obfuscation. Our findings demonstrate that current detection approaches cannot effectively handle the intermediate laundering region, necessitating fundamental advances in detection architectures beyond existing semantic and stylistic discrimination methods. For detailed code implementation, please see https://github.com/JonathanZha47/PadBen-Paraphrase-Attack-Benchmark.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 21 of its 43 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 Nov 2025.

Builds on

21 of 43 references.

References · 21

  1. 2023DetectGPT: Zero-Shot Machine-Generated Text Detection using Probability Curvaturecited by 705
  2. 2019Release Strategies and the Social Impacts of Language Modelscited by 505
  3. 2019GLTR: Statistical Detection and Visualization of Generated Textcited by 490
  4. 2023Paraphrasing evades detectors of AI-generated text, but retrieval is an effective defensecited by 401
  5. 2019PAWS: Paraphrase Adversaries from Word Scramblingcited by 395
  6. 2023Can AI-Generated Text be Reliably Detected?cited by 372
  7. 2023Fast-DetectGPT: Efficient Zero-Shot Detection of Machine-Generated Text via Conditional Probability Curvaturecited by 278
  8. 2024Spotting LLMs With Binoculars: Zero-Shot Detection of Machine-Generated Textcited by 255
  9. 2023RADAR: Robust AI-Text Detection via Adversarial Learningcited by 187
  10. 2024RAID: A Shared Benchmark for Robust Evaluation of Machine-Generated Text Detectorscited by 157
  11. 2023MAGE: Machine-generated Text Detection in the Wildcited by 130
  12. 2017Bilateral Multi-Perspective Matching for Natural Language Sentencescited by 120
9 more
  1. 2023Testing of Detection Tools for AI-Generated Textcited by 86
  2. 2023Large Language Models can be Guided to Evade AI-Generated Text Detectioncited by 43
  3. 2023Fighting Fire with Fire: Can ChatGPT Detect AI-generated Text?cited by 39
  4. 2024Capabilities of Large Language Models in Control Engineering: A Benchmark Study on GPT-4, Claude 3 Opus, and Gemini 1.0 Ultracited by 36
  5. 2023HC3 Plus: A Semantic-Invariant Human ChatGPT Comparison Corpuscited by 33
  6. 2024Humanizing Machine-Generated Content: Evading AI-Text Detection through Adversarial Attackcited by 27
  7. 2024PARAPHRASUS : A Comprehensive Benchmark for Evaluating Paraphrase Detection Modelscited by 7
  8. 2024Understanding the Effects of Human-written Paraphrases in LLM-generated Text Detectioncited by 6
  9. 2025Complete Evasion, Zero Modification: PDF Attacks on AI Text Detectioncited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.

3 papers.