DSIPA: Detecting LLM-Generated Texts via Sentiment-Invariant Patterns Divergence Analysis
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
The rapid advancement of large language models (LLMs) presents new security challenges, particularly in detecting machine-generated text used for misinformation, impersonation, and content forgery. Most existing detection approaches struggle with robustness against adversarial perturbation, paraphrasing attacks, and domain shifts, often requiring restrictive access to model parameters or large labeled datasets. To address this, we propose DSIPA, a novel training-free framework that detects LLM-generated content by quantifying sentiment distributional stability under controlled stylistic variation. It is based on the observation that LLMs typically exhibit more emotionally consistent outputs, while human-written texts display greater affective variation. Our framework operates in a zero-shot, black-box manner, leveraging two unsupervised metrics, sentiment distribution consistency and sentiment distribution preservation, to capture these intrinsic behavioral asymmetries without the need for parameter updates or probability access. Extensive experiments are conducted on state-of-the-art proprietary and open-source models, including GPT-5.2, Gemini-1.5-pro, Claude-3, and LLaMa-3.3. Evaluations on five domains, such as news articles, programming code, student essays, academic papers, and community comments, demonstrate that DSIPA improves F1 detection scores by up to 49.89% over baseline methods. The framework exhibits superior generalizability across domains and strong resilience to adversarial conditions, providing a robust and interpretable behavioral signal for secure content identification in the evolving LLM landscape.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 46 of its 60 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 Apr 2026.
Builds on
46 of 60 references.
References · 46
- 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,053
- 2023Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early experiments with GPT-4cited by 2,579
- 2023DetectGPT: Zero-Shot Machine-Generated Text Detection using Probability Curvaturecited by 705
- 2023A Watermark for Large Language Modelscited by 667
- 2024A Survey on Large Language Models for Code Generationcited by 646
- 2023A Comprehensive Overview of Large Language Modelscited by 639
- 2019Release Strategies and the Social Impacts of Language Modelscited by 505
- 2019GLTR: Statistical Detection and Visualization of Generated Textcited by 490
- 2023"Do Anything Now": Characterizing and Evaluating In-The-Wild Jailbreak Prompts on Large Language Modelscited by 457
- 2023Harnessing the Power of LLMs in Practice: A Survey on ChatGPT and Beyondcited by 409
- 2023Can AI-Generated Text be Reliably Detected?cited by 372
- 2023Fast-DetectGPT: Efficient Zero-Shot Detection of Machine-Generated Text via Conditional Probability Curvaturecited by 278
34 more
- 2023Sentiment Analysis in the Era of Large Language Models: A Reality Checkcited by 262
- 2024Spotting LLMs With Binoculars: Zero-Shot Detection of Machine-Generated Textcited by 255
- 2023Evaluating the Moral Beliefs Encoded in LLMscited by 211
- 2023RADAR: Robust AI-Text Detection via Adversarial Learningcited by 187
- 2023On the Reliability of Watermarks for Large Language Modelscited by 170
- 2023Can ChatGPT Understand Too? A Comparative Study on ChatGPT and Fine-tuned BERTcited by 155
- 2023Large Language Models Understand and Can be Enhanced by Emotional Stimulicited by 143
- 2023DNA-GPT: Divergent N-Gram Analysis for Training-Free Detection of GPT-Generated Textcited by 127
- 2020Adversarial Watermarking Transformer: Towards Tracing Text Provenance with Data Hidingcited by 121
- 2023Intrinsic Dimension Estimation for Robust Detection of AI-Generated Textscited by 111
- 2021Examining Zero-Shot Vulnerability Repair with Large Language Modelscited by 105
- 2022Human heuristics for AI-generated language are flawedcited by 104
- 2023Ghostbuster: Detecting Text Ghostwritten by Large Language Modelscited by 90
- 2022A Survey of Knowledge Enhanced Pre-trained Language Modelscited by 76
- 2022Do Language Models Plagiarize?cited by 72
- 2023A Survey on Detection of LLMs-Generated Contentcited by 70
- 2022A Survey on Aspect-Based Sentiment Analysis: Tasks, Methods, and Challengescited by 61
- 2023Multiscale Positive-Unlabeled Detection of AI-Generated Textscited by 59
- 2025LLM Agents for Education: Advances and Applicationscited by 59
- 2023Fairness-guided Few-shot Prompting for Large Language Modelscited by 53
- 2023Watermarking Conditional Text Generation for AI Detection: Unveiling Challenges and a Semantic-Aware Watermark Remedycited by 45
- 2024Few-Shot Detection of Machine-Generated Text using Style Representationscited by 40
- 2022Deepfake Text Detection: Limitations and Opportunitiescited by 37
- 2024A Survey on Generative AI and LLM for Video Generation, Understanding, and Streamingcited by 37
- 2024DetectRL: Benchmarking LLM-Generated Text Detection in Real-World Scenarioscited by 37
- 2024Detecting Machine-Generated Texts by Multi-Population Aware Optimization for Maximum Mean Discrepancycited by 20
- 2020Reverse Engineering Configurations of Neural Text Generation Modelscited by 14
- 2024Online Detection of LLM-Generated Texts via Sequential Hypothesis Testing by Bettingcited by 11
- 2024On the Generalization and Adaptation Ability of Machine-Generated Text Detectors in Academic Writingcited by 10
- 2024When Neutral Summaries are not that Neutral: Quantifying Political Neutrality in LLM-Generated News Summariescited by 7
- 2026HoneyTrap: Deceiving Large Language Model Attackers to Honeypot Traps with Resilient Multi-Agent Defensecited by 6
- 2024Trustworthy AI-Generative Content for Intelligent Network Service: Robustness, Security, and Fairnesscited by 3
- 2025Model-Agnostic Sentiment Distribution Stability Analysis for Robust LLM-Generated Texts Detectioncited by 2
- 2025StyleDecipher: Robust and Explainable Detection of LLM-Generated Texts with Stylistic Analysiscited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.