SPOT: Text Source Prediction from Originality Score Thresholding
0
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- The paper introduces a new technique called SPOT (Text Source Prediction from Originality Score Thresholding) for detecting machine-generated text.
- SPOT analyzes the originality score of a given text and uses a threshold to classify it as either human-written or machine-generated.
- The paper evaluates SPOT's performance on various datasets and compares it to other state-of-the-art methods for machine-generated text detection.
Plain English Explanation
SPOT: Text Source Prediction from Originality Score Thresholding is a new technique for identifying whether a piece of text was written by a human or generated by a machine. The key idea is to look at the "originality" of the text and use a threshold to decide if it's human or machine-generated.
Imagine you have a stack of essays, some written by students and some generated by an AI writing assistant. SPOT would analyze each essay and give it an "originality score" – a measure of how unique and human-like the writing is. If the score is above a certain threshold, SPOT would classify the essay as human-written. If it's below the threshold, SPOT would say it's machine-generated.
This approach is useful because as AI language models become more advanced, it's getting harder to tell human and machine-generated text apart. SPOT provides a way to automatically make this distinction, which could be helpful for tasks like plagiarism detection, content moderation, or fact-checking.
The researchers tested SPOT on various datasets and found that it performed well compared to other state-of-the-art methods for detecting machine-generated text. They also discussed some potential limitations and areas for future research, such as improving the originality scoring mechanism and making the system more robust to different writing styles.
Technical Explanation
SPOT: Text Source Prediction from Originality Score Thresholding is a novel technique for differentiating between human-written and machine-generated text. The core idea is to analyze the "originality" of a given text and use a threshold to classify it as either human or machine-generated.
The authors first define an "originality score" that measures the uniqueness and human-likeness of a piece of text. This score is computed using a pre-trained language model, which assigns probabilities to each word in the text based on the context. The intuition is that human-written text will have a higher originality score than machine-generated text, which tends to be more repetitive and predictable.
Next, the researchers introduce the SPOT algorithm, which takes the originality score as input and applies a threshold to classify the text. If the originality score is above the threshold, SPOT labels the text as human-written; if it's below the threshold, SPOT classifies it as machine-generated.
The authors evaluate SPOT's performance on several datasets, including CCNews, GPT-2 Output Dataset, and Pile. They compare SPOT to other state-of-the-art methods for machine-generated text detection, such as GPT-2 Output Detector and GLTR. The results show that SPOT achieves competitive or better performance across various metrics, including accuracy, precision, and recall.
Critical Analysis
The SPOT approach presents a promising solution for detecting machine-generated text, but it also has some limitations and areas for further research. One potential concern is the reliance on a pre-trained language model for computing the originality score. The performance of SPOT may be sensitive to the specific language model used, and it's not clear how well it would generalize to different domains or writing styles.
Additionally, the authors acknowledge that the originality score threshold is a hyperparameter that needs to be tuned for optimal performance. In a real-world deployment, finding the right threshold may require extensive experimentation and validation, which could limit the practical applicability of the method.
It would also be interesting to see how SPOT performs on more adversarial or targeted machine-generated text, where the goal is to specifically mimic human writing patterns. The authors mention that SPOT may be vulnerable to such attacks, and further research is needed to improve its robustness.
Overall, the SPOT technique represents a valuable contribution to the field of machine-generated text detection, but more work is needed to address its limitations and make it more widely applicable.
Conclusion
SPOT: Text Source Prediction from Originality Score Thresholding introduces a novel approach for differentiating between human-written and machine-generated text. The key idea is to analyze the "originality" of a given text and use a threshold to classify it as either human or machine-generated.
The paper presents a thorough evaluation of SPOT's performance on various datasets and compares it to other state-of-the-art methods for machine-generated text detection. The results demonstrate that SPOT can achieve competitive or better performance in terms of accuracy, precision, and recall.
While SPOT shows promise as a tool for identifying machine-generated text, the authors also acknowledge some limitations and areas for further research. These include the sensitivity to the pre-trained language model, the need for careful tuning of the originality score threshold, and the potential vulnerability to more adversarial or targeted machine-generated text.
Overall, the SPOT technique represents an important step forward in the ongoing effort to detect and mitigate the growing challenge of machine-generated content, which has significant implications for a wide range of applications, from content moderation to fact-checking and beyond.
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
0
SPOT: Text Source Prediction from Originality Score Thresholding
Edouard Yvinec, Gabriel Kasser
The wide acceptance of large language models (LLMs) has unlocked new applications and social risks. Popular countermeasures aim at detecting misinformation, usually involve domain specific models trained to recognize the relevance of any information. Instead of evaluating the validity of the information, we propose to investigate LLM generated text from the perspective of trust. In this study, we define trust as the ability to know if an input text was generated by a LLM or a human. To do so, we design SPOT, an efficient method, that classifies the source of any, standalone, text input based on originality score. This score is derived from the prediction of a given LLM to detect other LLMs. We empirically demonstrate the robustness of the method to the architecture, training data, evaluation data, task and compression of modern LLMs.
Read more6/3/2024
🔎
0
Deepfake Text Detection in the Wild
Yafu Li, Qintong Li, Leyang Cui, Wei Bi, Zhilin Wang, Longyue Wang, Linyi Yang, Shuming Shi, Yue Zhang
Large language models (LLMs) have achieved human-level text generation, emphasizing the need for effective AI-generated text detection to mitigate risks like the spread of fake news and plagiarism. Existing research has been constrained by evaluating detection methods on specific domains or particular language models. In practical scenarios, however, the detector faces texts from various domains or LLMs without knowing their sources. To this end, we build a comprehensive testbed by gathering texts from diverse human writings and texts generated by different LLMs. Empirical results show challenges in distinguishing machine-generated texts from human-authored ones across various scenarios, especially out-of-distribution. These challenges are due to the decreasing linguistic distinctions between the two sources. Despite challenges, the top-performing detector can identify 86.54% out-of-domain texts generated by a new LLM, indicating the feasibility for application scenarios. We release our resources at https://github.com/yafuly/MAGE.
Read more5/22/2024
0
Zero-Shot Machine-Generated Text Detection Using Mixture of Large Language Models
Matthieu Dubois, Franc{c}ois Yvon, Pablo Piantanida
The dissemination of Large Language Models (LLMs), trained at scale, and endowed with powerful text-generating abilities has vastly increased the threats posed by generative AI technologies by reducing the cost of producing harmful, toxic, faked or forged content. In response, various proposals have been made to automatically discriminate artificially generated from human-written texts, typically framing the problem as a classification problem. Most approaches evaluate an input document by a well-chosen detector LLM, assuming that low-perplexity scores reliably signal machine-made content. As using one single detector can induce brittleness of performance, we instead consider several and derive a new, theoretically grounded approach to combine their respective strengths. Our experiments, using a variety of generator LLMs, suggest that our method effectively increases the robustness of detection.
Read more9/14/2024
0
Identifying the Source of Generation for Large Language Models
Bumjin Park, Jaesik Choi
Large language models (LLMs) memorize text from several sources of documents. In pretraining, LLM trains to maximize the likelihood of text but neither receives the source of the text nor memorizes the source. Accordingly, LLM can not provide document information on the generated content, and users do not obtain any hint of reliability, which is crucial for factuality or privacy infringement. This work introduces token-level source identification in the decoding step, which maps the token representation to the reference document. We propose a bi-gram source identifier, a multi-layer perceptron with two successive token representations as input for better generalization. We conduct extensive experiments on Wikipedia and PG19 datasets with several LLMs, layer locations, and identifier sizes. The overall results show a possibility of token-level source identifiers for tracing the document, a crucial problem for the safe use of LLMs.
Read more7/19/2024