arXiv preprint ·
Who Wrote It Is Not Enough: Detecting Who Contributed the Insight
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
As LLMs increasingly assist scientific writing and peer review, detecting who wrote the text is no longer sufficient: we need to determine who contributed the underlying insight. We introduce Insight Provenance, the task of identifying whether a review insight originates from a human, an LLM, or their hybrid contribution. We construct InsightProv-v0 from 4,057 scientific papers and 12,660 human reviews, simulating different levels of LLM involvement with GPT-4o, Gemini, and DeepSeek and annotating provenance at the sentence level. We show that strong performance on raw data can be misleading, as models exploit linguistic and textual-authorship shortcuts that degrade substantially under progressively debiased evaluation. We therefore propose a two-stage adversarial framework that suppresses shortcut signals while preserving provenance-relevant information. Beyond detection, extensive analyses reveal what makes intellectual authorship identifiable: paper grounding and neighboring review context provide complementary provenance signals, while human, hybrid, and AI insights systematically differ in their information sources and failure modes. Most strikingly, AI insights predominantly remain close to generic or paper-provided information, whereas human insights more often introduce external knowledge and independent judgment. These findings suggest that while wording can be rewritten by an LLM, the provenance of an idea leaves a deeper and more persistent signal.
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
Automatic Speech Recognition for Low-Resource Sinhala: A Critical Review of Methods, Challenges, and Future Directions
Disentangling Models from Personas in Heterogeneous LLM Simulations
Knowing the Rules, Applying the Rules: Evaluating Language Models on Traditional Chinese Bazi
Quality-Aware Self-Correcting Speech Translation on an Edge Device
Spend Bytes on Breadth: Precision-Count Trade-offs for Decode-Time KV Compression in Long Chain-of-Thought Reasoning
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.