On the Salience of Low-Probability Tokens for AI-Generated Text Detection: A Multiscale Uncertainty Perspective
Authors: Yikai Guo, Bin Wang, Xilai Fan, Wenjun Ke, Haoran Luo
Abstract
AI-generated text increasingly blends with human writing, raising practical risks such as misinformation, academic misuse, and corpora contamination. While statistical detectors are appealing for efficiency and generalization, they suffer from two key limitations. (i) Boilerplate dominance, boilerplate tokens shared across human and LLM writing can overwhelm discriminative signals. (ii) Brittle point estimates, relying on a single probability score yields unstable decisions under adversarial manipulations. To address these issues, we propose Uncertainty, a multiscale uncertainty estimator that focuses on informative low-probability tokens, which more clearly expose distributional discrepancies. Locally, it alleviates boilerplate dominance by averaging the log-probabilities of low-probability tokens; globally, it reduces brittleness by capturing the distributional shape of this low-probability region via Rényi entropy. We further extend the detector to Uncertainty++ via conditional independent sampling, yielding a more stable uncertainty estimation. Experiments across seven datasets and sixteen LLMs demonstrate high effectiveness, generalization, and robustness. Our code is available at https://github.com/guoyikai2000/Uncertainty-AIGT.
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.
Detecting AI-generated text is an important but challenging problem. Existing likelihood-based detection methods are often sensitive to content complexity and may exhibit unstable performance. In this paper, our key insight is that modern Large Language Models (LLMs) undergo alignment (including fine-tuning and preference tuning), leaving a measurable distributional imprint. We theoretically derive this imprint by abstracting the alignment process as a sequence of constrained optimization steps, showing that the log-likelihood ratio can naturally decompose into implicit instructional biases and preference rewards. We refer to this quantity as the Alignment Imprint. Furthermore, to mitigate the instability in high-entropy regions, we introduce Log-likelihood Alignment Preference Discrepancy (LAPD), a standardized information-weighted statistic based on alignment imprint. We provide statistical guarantee that alignment-based statistics dominate Fast-DetectGPT in performance. We also theoretically show that LAPD strictly improves the unweighted alignment scores when the aligned and base models are close in distribution. Extensive experiments show that LAPD achieves an improvement 45.82% relative to the strongest existing baselines, yielding large and consistent gains across all settings.
The rapid advancement of large language models (LLMs) has made AI-generated text detection increasingly critical. Existing zero-shot detectors assume that more token-level evidence leads to more reliable detection. However, our empirical study challenges this consensus: fewer tokens sometimes work better, retaining only 40% can yield optimal performance, yet this benefit is not universal. Using the Entropy Gap Score (EGS), we introduce top-k cumulative probability filtering as a diagnostic probe. Across three representative settings, filtering exhibits strikingly different behaviors. We analyze EGS via typical set theory and quantify its dynamics through entropy calibration and distribution analysis. We find that filtering helps for weak source LMs, where low-entropy tokens are harmful, but fails for strong source LMs, where they are not notably harmful. Our work provides the first systematic analysis showing that some tokens are not merely uninformative but systematically harmful due to entropy miscalibration, revealing a two-sided trade-off in token-level detection.