Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

AIDBench: A benchmark for evaluating the authorship identification capability of large language models

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 2411.13226 v1 pith:VDIRZDXC submitted 2024-11-20 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords authorshipidentificationllmsaidbenchmodelsauthorprivacyrisks
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

As large language models (LLMs) rapidly advance and integrate into daily life, the privacy risks they pose are attracting increasing attention. We focus on a specific privacy risk where LLMs may help identify the authorship of anonymous texts, which challenges the effectiveness of anonymity in real-world systems such as anonymous peer review systems. To investigate these risks, we present AIDBench, a new benchmark that incorporates several author identification datasets, including emails, blogs, reviews, articles, and research papers. AIDBench utilizes two evaluation methods: one-to-one authorship identification, which determines whether two texts are from the same author; and one-to-many authorship identification, which, given a query text and a list of candidate texts, identifies the candidate most likely written by the same author as the query text. We also introduce a Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG)-based method to enhance the large-scale authorship identification capabilities of LLMs, particularly when input lengths exceed the models' context windows, thereby establishing a new baseline for authorship identification using LLMs. Our experiments with AIDBench demonstrate that LLMs can correctly guess authorship at rates well above random chance, revealing new privacy risks posed by these powerful models. The source code and data will be made publicly available after acceptance.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Quantifying Misattribution Unfairness in Authorship Attribution

    cs.CL 2025-06 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

    Authorship attribution models misattribute texts to some authors far more often than chance, and the risk is highest for authors whose author embeddings sit near the centroid.

Pith tools