# Humanly: A Configurable and Traceable Environment for Human-AI Collaborative Writing

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.21758 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.21758/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 10 of its 13 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 23 Jul 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 10 of 10)

- [A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1705.07874/) (2017)
- [A Watermark for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2301.10226/) (2023)
- [GPT detectors are biased against non-native English writers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.02819/) (2023)
- [Testing of Detection Tools for AI-Generated Text](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.15666/) (2023)
- [RedTeamCUA: Realistic Adversarial Testing of Computer-Use Agents in Hybrid Web-OS Environments](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.21936/) (2025)
- [A Survey on the Safety and Security Threats of Computer-Using Agents: JARVIS or Ultron?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.10924/) (2025)
- [GenAI Detection Tools, Adversarial Techniques and Implications for Inclusivity in Higher Education](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.19148/) (2024)
- [Stop Automating Peer Review Without Rigorous Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.03202/) (2026)
- [Can AI Truly Represent Your Voice in Deliberations? A Comprehensive Study of Large-Scale Opinion Aggregation with LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.05154/) (2025)
- [Policies Permitting LLM Use for Polishing Peer Reviews Are Currently Not Enforceable](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.20450/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Teachers, conference chairs, and public readers all judge writing from limited evidence, seeing only a finished document and not the process that produced it. Final text alone cannot reveal whether a document was produced through human typing, AI generation, or mixed human-AI collaboration. Existing process-tracking tools help, but many are tied to host-document histories, provide coarse activity records, and offer limited control over the writing environment. Humanly is a writing platform that makes the writing process itself the evidence. Users configure writing environments for personal documents or assigned tasks and draft in a workspace that records writing activity and in-platform AI assistance. Humanly can package a completed session into a sealed writing certificate with configuration-aware anomaly behavior review. It can support writing scenarios such as course assignments, peer review, and personal certification. Our user study shows that Humanly is helpful across roles, and a red-teaming study shows that the Humanly Typing Detector distinguishes human hand typing from automated typing.