Who Wrote This? The Key to Zero-Shot LLM-Generated Text Detection Is GECScore
2405.04286
0
0
🔎
Abstract
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.
Create account to get full access
Overview
- Large language model (LLM) generated text detectors rely heavily on sizable training data, while white-box zero-shot detectors are limited by the accessibility of the source model.
- This paper proposes a simple but effective black-box zero-shot detection approach based on the observation that human-written texts typically contain more grammatical errors than LLM-generated texts.
- The proposed method computes the Grammar Error Correction Score (GECScore) to distinguish between human-written and LLM-generated text.
Plain English Explanation
The paper explores a new way to detect whether a given text was written by a human or generated by a large language model (LLM), such as GPT-3. Existing approaches to this problem often rely on having a lot of training data, which can be hard to come by. The authors of this paper found a different approach that doesn't need any training data.
The key insight is that human-written texts tend to have more grammatical errors than texts generated by LLMs. So the researchers developed a method that looks at the "Grammar Error Correction Score" (GECScore) of the text. This score measures how many grammatical errors are present, and it can be used to decide whether the text was written by a human or generated by an LLM.
The paper shows that this simple approach outperforms more complex, state-of-the-art methods, even when the LLM-generated text is modified to try to fool the detector. This suggests that the GECScore-based approach is a robust and effective way to distinguish human-written and LLM-generated text, without needing access to the LLM model or a lot of training data.
Technical Explanation
The paper proposes a black-box zero-shot detection approach to distinguish between human-written and LLM-generated text. This approach is based on the observation that human-written texts typically contain more grammatical errors than LLM-generated texts.
The key component of the proposed method is the computation of the Grammar Error Correction Score (GECScore), which measures the number of grammatical errors in the given text. The researchers hypothesize that this score can be used as a reliable indicator to differentiate between human-written and LLM-generated text.
The authors conduct extensive experiments to evaluate the performance of their method. They compare it against current state-of-the-art zero-shot and supervised detection approaches, and the results show that the proposed GECScore-based method outperforms these methods, achieving an average Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic (AUROC) score of 98.7%. Additionally, the method demonstrates strong robustness against paraphrase and adversarial perturbation attacks, where the LLM-generated text is modified to try to fool the detector.
Critical Analysis
The paper presents a novel and effective approach for detecting LLM-generated text without the need for any training data or access to the source LLM model. The key strength of the proposed method is its simplicity and robustness, as it relies on a straightforward metric (GECScore) that captures a fundamental difference between human-written and LLM-generated text.
However, the paper acknowledges that the approach may not be as effective in cases where the LLM-generated text is carefully crafted to mimic human-written text, with a similar level of grammatical errors. In such scenarios, the GECScore-based method may struggle to accurately differentiate between the two.
Additionally, the paper does not address the potential limitations of the GECScore metric itself. It is possible that certain types of LLMs or text generation techniques could produce outputs that are indistinguishable from human-written text in terms of grammatical correctness, rendering the GECScore-based approach less effective.
Further research could explore ways to enhance the proposed method, such as combining the GECScore with other stylometric or linguistic features to create a more comprehensive detection system. Ongoing research in this area may also shed light on alternative approaches and their respective strengths and weaknesses.
Conclusion
This paper presents a simple yet effective black-box zero-shot approach for detecting LLM-generated text, based on the observation that human-written texts tend to contain more grammatical errors than LLM-generated texts. The proposed method, which computes the GECScore of the given text, outperforms current state-of-the-art detection methods and demonstrates strong robustness against various attacks.
While the approach has limitations in scenarios where the LLM-generated text is carefully crafted to mimic human-written text, the paper's findings suggest that the GECScore-based method can be a valuable tool in the broader effort to decipher textual authenticity and address the growing challenges posed by LLM-generated content. As the field of LLM-generated text detection continues to evolve, this work provides a promising starting point for further exploration and refinement.
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
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
🔎
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
🏷️
Generation-driven Contrastive Self-training for Zero-shot Text Classification with Instruction-following LLM
Ruohong Zhang, Yau-Shian Wang, Yiming Yang
0
0
The remarkable performance of large language models (LLMs) in zero-shot language understanding has garnered significant attention. However, employing LLMs for large-scale inference or domain-specific fine-tuning requires immense computational resources due to their substantial model size. To overcome these limitations, we introduce a novel method, namely GenCo, which leverages the strong generative power of LLMs to assist in training a smaller and more adaptable language model. In our method, an LLM plays an important role in the self-training loop of a smaller model in two important ways. Firstly, the LLM is used to augment each input instance with a variety of possible continuations, enriching its semantic context for better understanding. Secondly, it helps crafting additional high-quality training pairs, by rewriting input texts conditioned on predicted labels. This ensures the generated texts are highly relevant to the predicted labels, alleviating the prediction error during pseudo-labeling, while reducing the dependency on large volumes of unlabeled text. In our experiments, GenCo outperforms previous state-of-the-art methods when only limited ($<5%$ of original) in-domain text data is available. Notably, our approach surpasses the performance of Alpaca-7B with human prompts, highlighting the potential of leveraging LLM for self-training.
4/16/2024
Large Language Models Are State-of-the-Art Evaluator for Grammatical Error Correction
Masamune Kobayashi, Masato Mita, Mamoru Komachi
0
0
Large Language Models (LLMs) have been reported to outperform existing automatic evaluation metrics in some tasks, such as text summarization and machine translation. However, there has been a lack of research on LLMs as evaluators in grammatical error correction (GEC). In this study, we investigate the performance of LLMs in GEC evaluation by employing prompts designed to incorporate various evaluation criteria inspired by previous research. Our extensive experimental results demonstrate that GPT-4 achieved Kendall's rank correlation of 0.662 with human judgments, surpassing all existing methods. Furthermore, in recent GEC evaluations, we have underscored the significance of the LLMs scale and particularly emphasized the importance of fluency among evaluation criteria.
5/28/2024