REVIEW 2 cited by
M4GT-Bench: Evaluation Benchmark for Black-Box Machine-Generated Text Detection
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
read the original abstract
The advent of Large Language Models (LLMs) has brought an unprecedented surge in machine-generated text (MGT) across diverse channels. This raises legitimate concerns about its potential misuse and societal implications. The need to identify and differentiate such content from genuine human-generated text is critical in combating disinformation, preserving the integrity of education and scientific fields, and maintaining trust in communication. In this work, we address this problem by introducing a new benchmark based on a multilingual, multi-domain, and multi-generator corpus of MGTs -- M4GT-Bench. The benchmark is compiled of three tasks: (1) mono-lingual and multi-lingual binary MGT detection; (2) multi-way detection where one need to identify, which particular model generated the text; and (3) mixed human-machine text detection, where a word boundary delimiting MGT from human-written content should be determined. On the developed benchmark, we have tested several MGT detection baselines and also conducted an evaluation of human performance. We see that obtaining good performance in MGT detection usually requires an access to the training data from the same domain and generators. The benchmark is available at https://github.com/mbzuai-nlp/M4GT-Bench.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Stress-testing Machine Generated Text Detection: Shifting Language Models Writing Style to Fool Detectors
Fine-tuning LLMs with DPO to push generated news and abstracts toward human style substantially reduces the F1 scores of state-of-the-art machine-generated text detectors.
-
Synthetic Artifact Auditing: Tracing LLM-Generated Synthetic Data Usage in Downstream Applications
A three-method auditing framework detects with roughly 87 to 97 percent accuracy whether classifiers, generators, and t-SNE plots were trained on or derived from LLM-generated synthetic data.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.