MixDetect: Word-Level Localization and Quantification of AI Editing
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Large language models are increasingly used to edit human-written text rather than generate entire texts from scratch. Conventional AI-text detectors mainly distinguish human-written from fully AI-generated text, while recent methods for AI-edited text typically provide only a text-level label or editing-degree score. We introduce MixDetect, a word-level framework for localizing and quantifying AI editing. MixDetect separately predicts whether each word has been edited and, conditional on editing, how substantial the edit is, allowing editing scope and editing intensity to be estimated separately. During training, source--edited pairs are aligned to construct word-level supervision, while inference requires only the input text. Experiments show that MixDetect accurately localizes AI-edited words, reflects differences in editing intensity, and reveals different scope--intensity patterns across editing degrees and operations. The overall AI editing magnitude increases under additional AI editing, decreases when AI-generated text is edited by humans, and remains nearly unchanged under ordinary human-to-human editing. The aggregated text-level predictions also perform well on binary and ternary AI-text classification and remain effective under domain and generator shifts. These results show that AI editing can be analyzed beyond a single authorship label or editing-degree score by identifying both where AI editing occurs and how substantial the edits are.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 20 of its 29 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 Sep 2026.
Builds on
20 of 29 references.
References · 20
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
- 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,372
- 2024Qwen2.5 Technical Reportcited by 4,942
- 2021DeBERTaV3: Improving DeBERTa using ELECTRA-Style Pre-Training with Gradient-Disentangled Embedding Sharingcited by 1,254
- 2023DetectGPT: Zero-Shot Machine-Generated Text Detection using Probability Curvaturecited by 726
- 2019GLTR: Statistical Detection and Visualization of Generated Textcited by 496
- 2023Fast-DetectGPT: Efficient Zero-Shot Detection of Machine-Generated Text via Conditional Probability Curvaturecited by 287
- 2024Spotting LLMs With Binoculars: Zero-Shot Detection of Machine-Generated Textcited by 263
- 2023SeqXGPT: Sentence-Level AI-Generated Text Detectioncited by 56
- 2024LLM-as-a-Coauthor: Can Mixed Human-Written and Machine-Generated Text Be Detected?cited by 49
- 2024Can AI writing be salvaged? Mitigating Idiosyncrasies and Improving Human-AI Alignment in the Writing Process through Editscited by 49
- 2024Training-free LLM-generated Text Detection by Mining Token Probability Sequencescited by 35
8 more
- 2024Beemo: Benchmark of Expert-edited Machine-generated Outputscited by 27
- 2025EditLens: Quantifying the Extent of AI Editing in Textcited by 26
- 2025Almost AI, Almost Human: The Challenge of Detecting AI-Polished Writingcited by 19
- 2026GPTZero: Robust Detection of LLM-Generated Textscited by 11
- 2022ArgRewrite V.2: an Annotated Argumentative Revisions Corpuscited by 9
- 2026Beyond the Final Actor: Modeling the Dual Roles of Creator and Editor for Fine-Grained LLM-Generated Text Detectioncited by 3
- 2026Once a Response, Always a Response: Detecting LLM-generated Text via Latent Prompt Restorationcited by 1
- 2026EVIL-Detect for NLPCC 2026 Shared Task 6: LLM-Generated Text Detectioncited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.