Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Deepfake Text Detection: Limitations and Opportunities

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2210.09421 v1 pith:OH3JPSOG submitted 2022-10-17 cs.CR cs.CLcs.LG

Deepfake Text Detection: Limitations and Opportunities

classification cs.CR cs.CLcs.LG
keywords textdeepfakedefensesdetectioncontentperformanceevaluationgeneralization
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Recent advances in generative models for language have enabled the creation of convincing synthetic text or deepfake text. Prior work has demonstrated the potential for misuse of deepfake text to mislead content consumers. Therefore, deepfake text detection, the task of discriminating between human and machine-generated text, is becoming increasingly critical. Several defenses have been proposed for deepfake text detection. However, we lack a thorough understanding of their real-world applicability. In this paper, we collect deepfake text from 4 online services powered by Transformer-based tools to evaluate the generalization ability of the defenses on content in the wild. We develop several low-cost adversarial attacks, and investigate the robustness of existing defenses against an adaptive attacker. We find that many defenses show significant degradation in performance under our evaluation scenarios compared to their original claimed performance. Our evaluation shows that tapping into the semantic information in the text content is a promising approach for improving the robustness and generalization performance of deepfake text detection schemes.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Policies Permitting LLM Use for Polishing Peer Reviews Are Currently Not Enforceable

    cs.CL 2026-03 accept novelty 6.5

    State-of-the-art AI detectors misclassify a non-trivial fraction of LLM-polished peer reviews as fully AI-generated, rendering polishing-only policies currently unenforceable.