arXiv preprint ·
Ontological Instability and Statistical Amplification: The Paradox of "Humanizing" LLM-Generated Text
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
Supervised AI-text detectors report high benchmark accuracy, but it is not clear what their decisions are based on. We analyze a RoBERTa-based detector under semantic, structural, and tokenizer-level perturbations, using the M4 dataset (N = 10,000) and controlled generations (N = 300). When Mistral-7B-Instruct was asked to make machine text sound more human, Verb Diversity rose from 0.77 to 0.92 and the outputs became easier to detect. Detection scores appear to track statistical complexity, which also leads to a 76.3% false-positive rate on formal human writing. As a control, we evaluate event-based Latent Space detection. Paraphrasing changed 87% of its event sequences (Jaccard = 0.067), and homoglyphs altered 70% of the extracted verbs even though extraction still ran (Jaccard = 0.30). Its best domain AUC was 0.577. RoBERTa's robustness seems specific to the features it uses, and structural abstraction did not make detection more robust.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Computation & Language / NLP
Learning When to Commit from Partial Speech for End-to-End Simultaneous Speech Translation
Principled Top-$k$ Selection for Language Models with Hybrid Gradients
VERSE: Verified Self-Evolving Optimizer for Agent Harnesses
DimSteer: Steering LLM Authoring with Automatically Discovered Stylistic Controls
Large Language Continuous Diffusion Models
Get the few papers worth your time in Computation & Language / NLP every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.