Abstract
With the rise of generative language models, machine-generated text detection has become a critical challenge. A wide variety of models is available, but inconsistent datasets, evaluation metrics, and assessment strategies obscure comparisons of model effectiveness. To address this, we evaluate 15 different detection models from six distinct systems, as well as seven trained models, across seven English-language textual test sets and three creative human-written datasets. We provide an empirical analysis of model performance, the influence of training and evaluation data, and the impact of key metrics. We find that no single system excels in all areas and nearly all are effective for certain tasks, and the representation of model performance is critically linked to dataset and metric choices. We find high variance in model ranks based on datasets and metrics, and overall poor performance on novel human-written texts in high-risk domains. Across datasets and metrics, we find that methodological choices that are often assumed or overlooked are essential for clearly and accurately reflecting model performance.
Explore similar work
Apr 28, 2026cs.CR
We present MGTEVAL, an extensible platform for systematic evaluation of Machine-Generated Text (MGT) detectors. Despite rapid progress in MGT detection, existing evaluations are often fragmented across datasets, preprocessing, attacks, and metrics, making results hard to compare and reproduce. MGTEVAL organizes the workflow into four components: Dataset Building, Dataset Attack, Detector Training, and Performance Evaluation. It supports constructing custom benchmarks by generating MGT with configurable LLMs, applying 12 text attacks to test sets, training detectors via a unified interface, and reporting effectiveness, robustness, and efficiency. The platform provides both command-line and Web-based interfaces for user-friendly experimentation without code rewriting.
Yuanfan Li, Qi Zhou, Chengzhengxu Li +5
Jun 3, 2026cs.CL
Although it is generally agreed that AI-generated text poses a broad societal risk, there is no common understanding in the AI-generated text detection literature on what constitutes harmful use. Rather, existing datasets and approaches often define their own criteria and make their own assumptions, sometimes implicitly, and often only loosely related to real-world needs and applications. To address this gap, we here systematically define various notions of AI-generated text and their characteristics. To study these, we collect AITDNA - a new benchmark of human-machine co-constructed texts that is annotated with detailed genesis information, such as the entire edit and AI-interaction history. We benchmark various machine-generated text detectors and find that they often only perform well for specific notions but not as broad detectors. We release code and data publicly.
Nils Dycke, Marina Sakharova, Nico Daheim +1
Apr 28, 2026cs.CL
Machine-generated text (MGT) detection requires identifying structurally invariant signals across generation models, rather than relying on model-specific fingerprints. In this respect, we hypothesize that while large language models excel at local semantic consistency, their autoregressive nature results in a specific kind of structural fragility compared to human writing. We propose Luminol-AIDetect, a novel, zero-shot statistical approach that exposes this fragility through coherence disruption. By applying a simple randomized text-shuffling procedure, we demonstrate that the resulting shift in perplexity serves as a principled, model-agnostic discriminant, as MGT displays a characteristic dispersion in perplexity-under-shuffling that differs markedly from the more stable structural variability of human-written text. Luminol-AIDetect leverages this distinction to inform its decision process, where a handful of perplexity-based scalar features are extracted from an input text and its shuffled version, then detection is performed via density estimation and ensemble-based prediction. Evaluated across 8 content domains, 11 adversarial attack types, and 18 languages, Luminol-AIDetect demonstrates state-of-the-art performance, with gains up to 17x lower FPR while being cheaper than prior methods.
Lucio La Cava, Andrea Tagarelli