Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Safeguarding Crowdsourcing Surveys from ChatGPT with Prompt Injection

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 2306.08833 v1 pith:PYPUOAYC submitted 2023-06-15 cs.HC

classification cs.HC
keywords llmsresponsessurveyscrowdsourcingdetectchatgptinjectionllm-generated
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

ChatGPT and other large language models (LLMs) have proven useful in crowdsourcing tasks, where they can effectively annotate machine learning training data. However, this means that they also have the potential for misuse, specifically to automatically answer surveys. LLMs can potentially circumvent quality assurance measures, thereby threatening the integrity of methodologies that rely on crowdsourcing surveys. In this paper, we propose a mechanism to detect LLM-generated responses to surveys. The mechanism uses "prompt injection", such as directions that can mislead LLMs into giving predictable responses. We evaluate our technique against a range of question scenarios, types, and positions, and find that it can reliably detect LLM-generated responses with more than 93% effectiveness. We also provide an open-source software to help survey designers use our technique to detect LLM responses. Our work is a step in ensuring that survey methodologies remain rigorous vis-a-vis LLMs.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Prompt-in-Content Attacks: Exploiting Uploaded Inputs to Hijack LLM Behavior

    cs.CR 2025-08 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Embedding a short 'system instruction' in a .docx file causes several commercial LLMs to refuse, substitute, redirect, or bias their output during summarization tasks.

  2. JavelinGuard: Low-Cost Transformer Architectures for LLM Security

    cs.LG 2025-06 reject novelty 4.0 of 10

    A study of five small transformer classifier architectures for LLM jailbreak and prompt injection detection claims low-latency accuracy comparable to large models, led by the multi-task Raudra design.

Pith tools