Applying Ensemble Methods to Model-Agnostic Machine-Generated Text Detection
2406.12570
0
0
🔎
Abstract
In this paper, we study the problem of detecting machine-generated text when the large language model (LLM) it is possibly derived from is unknown. We do so by apply ensembling methods to the outputs from DetectGPT classifiers (Mitchell et al. 2023), a zero-shot model for machine-generated text detection which is highly accurate when the generative (or base) language model is the same as the discriminative (or scoring) language model. We find that simple summary statistics of DetectGPT sub-model outputs yield an AUROC of 0.73 (relative to 0.61) while retaining its zero-shot nature, and that supervised learning methods sharply boost the accuracy to an AUROC of 0.94 but require a training dataset. This suggests the possibility of further generalisation to create a highly-accurate, model-agnostic machine-generated text detector.
Create account to get full access
Overview
- Researchers study the problem of detecting machine-generated text when the language model used to generate the text is unknown.
- They apply ensemble methods to the outputs of DetectGPT classifiers, a zero-shot model for detecting machine-generated text.
- The ensemble approach maintains the zero-shot nature of DetectGPT while improving accuracy, and supervised learning further boosts performance.
- This suggests the possibility of creating a highly accurate, model-agnostic machine-generated text detector.
Plain English Explanation
Imagine you have a text, and you want to know if it was written by a human or generated by a computer. This is an important problem, as machine-generated text could be used to spread misinformation or impersonate real people online.
The researchers in this paper looked at a technique called DetectGPT, which is good at detecting machine-generated text, but only when the language model used to generate the text is the same as the one used to detect it.
To make DetectGPT more useful in the real world, where the language model used to generate the text is often unknown, the researchers tried combining the outputs of multiple DetectGPT classifiers. This "ensemble" approach maintained DetectGPT's ability to detect machine-generated text without needing to know the language model, and even improved the accuracy.
The researchers also found that using supervised learning (where the model is trained on labeled examples) could further boost the accuracy of detecting machine-generated text, though this approach would require a dataset of labeled examples.
Overall, this suggests that it may be possible to create a highly accurate, "model-agnostic" detector of machine-generated text, which could be a valuable tool for combating the spread of misinformation online.
Technical Explanation
The researchers in this paper explored the problem of detecting machine-generated text when the language model (LLM) used to generate the text is unknown. They did this by applying ensemble methods to the outputs of DetectGPT classifiers, a zero-shot model for detecting machine-generated text.
DetectGPT is highly accurate at detecting machine-generated text, but only when the "generative" (or base) language model is the same as the "discriminative" (or scoring) language model. To overcome this limitation, the researchers explored using simple summary statistics of the DetectGPT sub-model outputs, which yielded an AUROC (a metric for evaluating binary classification) of 0.73, compared to 0.61 for the original DetectGPT model.
This ensemble approach maintained the zero-shot nature of DetectGPT, meaning it could detect machine-generated text without needing to know the language model used to generate it. The researchers also found that supervised learning methods could sharply boost the accuracy to an AUROC of 0.94, but this approach would require a training dataset of labeled examples.
These results suggest the possibility of further generalization to create a highly accurate, model-agnostic machine-generated text detector, which could be a valuable tool for combating the spread of misinformation online.
Critical Analysis
The researchers acknowledge several caveats and limitations in their work. For example, they note that their ensemble approach, while maintaining the zero-shot nature of DetectGPT, still relies on the availability of multiple DetectGPT classifiers, which may not always be the case.
Additionally, the supervised learning approach, while highly accurate, requires a dataset of labeled examples, which may be difficult to obtain in practice. The researchers also mention that their experiments were conducted on a limited set of language models and text types, and further research would be needed to assess the generalizability of their findings.
It's also worth considering the potential for adversarial attacks, where machine-generated text is deliberately crafted to evade detection. The researchers do not address this issue in the current paper, and it would be an important area for future research.
Despite these limitations, the researchers have made an important contribution to the field of machine-generated text detection. Their work suggests that ensemble and supervised learning techniques can significantly improve the performance of zero-shot detectors like DetectGPT, and that further research in this direction could lead to the development of highly accurate, model-agnostic detectors for combating the spread of misinformation.
Conclusion
This paper explores a novel approach to the problem of detecting machine-generated text when the language model used to generate the text is unknown. By applying ensemble methods to the outputs of DetectGPT classifiers, the researchers were able to maintain the zero-shot nature of the original model while significantly improving its accuracy.
The researchers also found that supervised learning methods could further boost the performance of the detector, though at the cost of requiring a labeled dataset. These findings suggest the possibility of creating a highly accurate, model-agnostic machine-generated text detector, which could be a valuable tool for combating the spread of misinformation online.
While the paper has some limitations, such as the reliance on the availability of multiple DetectGPT classifiers and the need for a labeled dataset in the supervised learning approach, it represents an important step forward in the field of machine-generated text detection. Continued research in this direction could lead to even more robust and versatile detectors that can help preserve the integrity of online communication and prevent the misuse of language models for malicious purposes.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
🔎
Efficient Detection of LLM-generated Texts with a Bayesian Surrogate Model
Yibo Miao, Hongcheng Gao, Hao Zhang, Zhijie Deng
0
0
The detection of machine-generated text, especially from large language models (LLMs), is crucial in preventing serious social problems resulting from their misuse. Some methods train dedicated detectors on specific datasets but fall short in generalizing to unseen test data, while other zero-shot ones often yield suboptimal performance. Although the recent DetectGPT has shown promising detection performance, it suffers from significant inefficiency issues, as detecting a single candidate requires querying the source LLM with hundreds of its perturbations. This paper aims to bridge this gap. Concretely, we propose to incorporate a Bayesian surrogate model, which allows us to select typical samples based on Bayesian uncertainty and interpolate scores from typical samples to other samples, to improve query efficiency. Empirical results demonstrate that our method significantly outperforms existing approaches under a low query budget. Notably, when detecting the text generated by LLaMA family models, our method with just 2 or 3 queries can outperform DetectGPT with 200 queries.
6/5/2024
Deciphering Textual Authenticity: A Generalized Strategy through the Lens of Large Language Semantics for Detecting Human vs. Machine-Generated Text
Mazal Bethany, Brandon Wherry, Emet Bethany, Nishant Vishwamitra, Anthony Rios, Peyman Najafirad
0
0
With the recent proliferation of Large Language Models (LLMs), there has been an increasing demand for tools to detect machine-generated text. The effective detection of machine-generated text face two pertinent problems: First, they are severely limited in generalizing against real-world scenarios, where machine-generated text is produced by a variety of generators, including but not limited to GPT-4 and Dolly, and spans diverse domains, ranging from academic manuscripts to social media posts. Second, existing detection methodologies treat texts produced by LLMs through a restrictive binary classification lens, neglecting the nuanced diversity of artifacts generated by different LLMs. In this work, we undertake a systematic study on the detection of machine-generated text in real-world scenarios. We first study the effectiveness of state-of-the-art approaches and find that they are severely limited against text produced by diverse generators and domains in the real world. Furthermore, t-SNE visualizations of the embeddings from a pretrained LLM's encoder show that they cannot reliably distinguish between human and machine-generated text. Based on our findings, we introduce a novel system, T5LLMCipher, for detecting machine-generated text using a pretrained T5 encoder combined with LLM embedding sub-clustering to address the text produced by diverse generators and domains in the real world. We evaluate our approach across 9 machine-generated text systems and 9 domains and find that our approach provides state-of-the-art generalization ability, with an average increase in F1 score on machine-generated text of 19.6% on unseen generators and domains compared to the top performing existing approaches and correctly attributes the generator of text with an accuracy of 93.6%.
4/4/2024
🔎
Who Wrote This? The Key to Zero-Shot LLM-Generated Text Detection Is GECScore
Junchao Wu, Runzhe Zhan, Derek F. Wong, Shu Yang, Xuebo Liu, Lidia S. Chao, Min Zhang
0
0
The efficacy of an large language model (LLM) generated text detector depends substantially on the availability of sizable training data. White-box zero-shot detectors, which require no such data, are nonetheless limited by the accessibility of the source model of the LLM-generated text. In this paper, we propose an simple but effective black-box zero-shot detection approach, predicated on the observation that human-written texts typically contain more grammatical errors than LLM-generated texts. This approach entails computing the Grammar Error Correction Score (GECScore) for the given text to distinguish between human-written and LLM-generated text. Extensive experimental results show that our method outperforms current state-of-the-art (SOTA) zero-shot and supervised methods, achieving an average AUROC of 98.7% and showing strong robustness against paraphrase and adversarial perturbation attacks.
5/8/2024
Few-Shot Detection of Machine-Generated Text using Style Representations
Rafael Rivera Soto, Kailin Koch, Aleem Khan, Barry Chen, Marcus Bishop, Nicholas Andrews
0
0
The advent of instruction-tuned language models that convincingly mimic human writing poses a significant risk of abuse. However, such abuse may be counteracted with the ability to detect whether a piece of text was composed by a language model rather than a human author. Some previous approaches to this problem have relied on supervised methods by training on corpora of confirmed human- and machine- written documents. Unfortunately, model under-specification poses an unavoidable challenge for neural network-based detectors, making them brittle in the face of data shifts, such as the release of newer language models producing still more fluent text than the models used to train the detectors. Other approaches require access to the models that may have generated a document in question, which is often impractical. In light of these challenges, we pursue a fundamentally different approach not relying on samples from language models of concern at training time. Instead, we propose to leverage representations of writing style estimated from human-authored text. Indeed, we find that features effective at distinguishing among human authors are also effective at distinguishing human from machine authors, including state-of-the-art large language models like Llama-2, ChatGPT, and GPT-4. Furthermore, given a handful of examples composed by each of several specific language models of interest, our approach affords the ability to predict which model generated a given document. The code and data to reproduce our experiments are available at https://github.com/LLNL/LUAR/tree/main/fewshot_iclr2024.
5/9/2024