Testing of Detection Tools for AI-Generated Text
arXiv:2306.15666 · doi:10.1007/s40979-023-00146-z
Abstract
Recent advances in generative pre-trained transformer large language models have emphasised the potential risks of unfair use of artificial intelligence (AI) generated content in an academic environment and intensified efforts in searching for solutions to detect such content. The paper examines the general functionality of detection tools for artificial intelligence generated text and evaluates them based on accuracy and error type analysis. Specifically, the study seeks to answer research questions about whether existing detection tools can reliably differentiate between human-written text and ChatGPT-generated text, and whether machine translation and content obfuscation techniques affect the detection of AI-generated text. The research covers 12 publicly available tools and two commercial systems (Turnitin and PlagiarismCheck) that are widely used in the academic setting. The researchers conclude that the available detection tools are neither accurate nor reliable and have a main bias towards classifying the output as human-written rather than detecting AI-generated text. Furthermore, content obfuscation techniques significantly worsen the performance of tools. The study makes several significant contributions. First, it summarises up-to-date similar scientific and non-scientific efforts in the field. Second, it presents the result of one of the most comprehensive tests conducted so far, based on a rigorous research methodology, an original document set, and a broad coverage of tools. Third, it discusses the implications and drawbacks of using detection tools for AI-generated text in academic settings.
arXiv comment38 pages, 13 figures and 10 tables, and an appendix with 18 figures. Submitted to the International Journal for Educational Integrity
References in corpus (9)
- Efficient Estimation of Word Representations in Vector Space
- How Close is ChatGPT to Human Experts? Comparison Corpus, Evaluation, and Detection
- Testing of Support Tools for Plagiarism Detection
- A Categorical Archive of ChatGPT Failures
- Paraphrasing evades detectors of AI-generated text, but retrieval is an effective defense
- AI vs. Human -- Differentiation Analysis of Scientific Content Generation
- On the Possibilities of AI-Generated Text Detection
- To ChatGPT, or not to ChatGPT: That is the question!
- Evaluating AIGC Detectors on Code Content
Cited by in corpus (13)
- Generative AI Literacy: Twelve Defining Competencies
- GenAI Detection Tools, Adversarial Techniques and Implications for Inclusivity in Higher Education
- GenAI Mirage: The Impostor Bias and the Deepfake Detection Challenge in the Era of Artificial Illusions
- Research Integrity and GenAI: A Systematic Analysis of Ethical Challenges Across Research Phases
- GAIDE: A Framework for Using Generative AI to Assist in Course Content Development
- Decoding the AI Pen: Techniques and Challenges in Detecting AI-Generated Text
- A Statistical Framework of Watermarks for Large Language Models: Pivot, Detection Efficiency and Optimal Rules
- Can ChatGPT pass a physics degree? Making a case for reformation of assessment of undergraduate degrees
- GenAI as Digital Plastic: Understanding Synthetic Media Through Critical AI Literacy
- An Empirical Study of AI Generated Text Detection Tools
- "There Has To Be a Lot That We're Missing": Moderating AI-Generated Content on Reddit
- The Misclassification of Autistic Writing as AI-Generated
- AI-generated text boundary detection with RoFT