AI Paper Atlas

Research map / Large language models / Language, safety and interpretability

Zero-shot machine-text detection

Detect LLM-generated text with perplexity-based and reward-based zero-shot scores.

82 accepted papers at ICML, NeurIPS, ICLR, CVPR and AAAI (2018–2026) · an approach in Language, safety and interpretability, keyword cluster “watermarking · generated text · watermarks”

State History Tried Checklist Preprints Who Export

Where it stands

Not enough benchmark data Fewer than four papers report the same benchmark, so there is no record to follow.

28 papers in 2023–24 and 46 in 2025–26 (at ICML, NeurIPS, ICLR, CVPR and AAAI); its share of the topic shrank, from 4.0% to 2.5%.

How this is decided

A benchmark is tracked when at least four papers of this approach report their own method on the same dataset and metric in at least two different years. Its record is the best number reported up to 2024 compared with the best reported in 2025–26: still improving means at least 1% better, flat means at most 0.2% better with at least two papers from 2025–26 trying. Numbers on a different scale from the rest (a fraction among percentages) and far outliers are left out. Results come from different papers with different setups, so they are signals, not head-to-head comparisons. The share of papers is counted at ICML, NeurIPS, ICLR, CVPR and AAAI.

How it got here

2016: 0162017: 0172018: 1182019: 1192020: 2202021: 2212022: 2222023: 6232024: 22242025: 19252026: 2726

Most cited paper of each year

Earliest papers here

What has been tried

51 papers here report 518 measured changes (a component added, removed or swapped, compared with a baseline): helped 65%, no clear effect 7%, hurt 24%, mixed 4%. Papers mostly publish changes that helped, so "helped" is over-represented.

Ablations in recent papers

What was changedMeasured onResultEffectPaper
Increase n-gram feature length from 1 to 6XSum · AUROC58% -> 97%HelpedPosition: On the Possibilities of AI-Generated Text Detection (ICML 2024 · 53 citations)
use GPT2-xl instead of text-davinci-003 for perplexity calculationsix programming languages · AUCC: 0.79; C++: 0.75; C#: 0.73; Java: 0.72; JavaScript: 0.71; Python: 0.69HurtDetecting AI-Generated Code Assignments Using Perplexity of Large Language Models (AAAI 2024 · 45 citations)
Use GPT-J rather than the source model as the sampling modelXSum, SQuAD, and WritingPrompts; three source models · AUROC+0.0020 AUROC; relative improvement of 27%HelpedFast-DetectGPT: Efficient Zero-Shot Detection of Machine-Generated Text via Conditional Probability Curvature (ICLR 2024 · 20 citations)
Set γ=0.5 rather than γ=0.7Reddit-ELI5 · TPR at 1% FPR87.34 -> 91.00HelpedDNA-GPT: Divergent N-Gram Analysis for Training-Free Detection of GPT-Generated Text (ICLR 2024 · 20 citations)
increase prototype size from p=1 to p=2In-Domain, All · F1@30.571 -> 0.575HelpedTowards Automatic Boundary Detection for Human-AI Collaborative Hybrid Essay in Education (AAAI 2024 · 16 citations)
Combine perplexity and cross-perplexity as the Binoculars score instead of using Falcon perplexity aloneWriting Prompts · TPR @ 0.01% FPR0.86 -> 0.93HelpedSpotting LLMs With Binoculars: Zero-Shot Detection of Machine-Generated Text (ICML 2024 · 16 citations)
omit short training texts from backward operationsHC3-En-Sent · F158.60 ± 10.53 -> 62.42 ± 5.60HelpedMultiscale Positive-Unlabeled Detection of AI-Generated Texts (ICLR 2024 · 13 citations)
Use concatenation instead of absolute difference or dot product to combine feature vectorsWriting dataset generated by ChatGPT · AUROC89.81% and 93.84% ... 98.21%HelpedDPIC: Decoupling Prompt and Intrinsic Characteristics for LLM Generated Text Detection (NeurIPS 2024 · 12 citations)
Use code rewriting with similarity measurement rather than in-fill perturbation with similarityAPPS · AUROC74.55 -> 87.77; 71.55 -> 76.96; 74.23 -> 80.23; 53.43 -> 74.51HelpedUncovering LLM-Generated Code: A Zero-Shot Synthetic Code Detector via Code Rewriting (AAAI 2025 · 11 citations)
Use multi-level contrastive loss instead of plain contrastive lossDeepfake Cross-domains & Cross-models · AvgRec94.22 -> 96.15HelpedDeTeCtive: Detecting AI-generated Text via Multi-Level Contrastive Learning (NeurIPS 2024 · 11 citations)
Train UAR with Reddit, Twitter, and StackExchange rather than Reddit aloneUnseen domains, topics, and LLM, N=5 · pAUC0.868 (0.001) -> 0.886 (0.001)HelpedFew-Shot Detection of Machine-Generated Text using Style Representations (ICLR 2024 · 6 citations)
Use equivariance instead of invarianceNews · F160.29 -> 58.00HurtRaidar: geneRative AI Detection viA Rewriting (ICLR 2024 · 5 citations)

What reviewers will expect

Datasets and baselines named in the 26 papers of this approach from 2025–2026 that have a full-text summary. Leaving out the common ones is a frequent review question.

Datasets

  • XSum · 9 of 26 papers
  • WritingPrompts · 7 of 26 papers
  • PubMedQA · 4 of 26 papers
  • DetectRL · 4 of 26 papers
  • RAID · 4 of 26 papers
  • M4 · 4 of 26 papers
  • SQuAD · 3 of 26 papers
  • MT-Bench · 2 of 26 papers

Baselines

  • Fast-DetectGPT · 11 of 26 papers
  • LogRank · 10 of 26 papers
  • DetectGPT · 10 of 26 papers
  • Binoculars · 8 of 26 papers
  • Likelihood · 7 of 26 papers
  • Entropy · 7 of 26 papers
  • DNA-GPT · 6 of 26 papers
  • LRR · 5 of 26 papers

Recent preprints

Loading recent arXiv preprints…

    Who publishes on it

    Institutions on the most papers of this approach since 2023 (of 74 papers; from OpenAlex and the papers' affiliations).

    Use it

    Download BibTeX of 30 key papersOpen the topic in the interactive map

    Get alerts. Describe your idea in scime atlas and save it (free scime account): you get a weekly email when new preprints land close to it.

    Same keyword cluster

    Elsewhere in the topic

    Benchmark numbers, ablations and baseline numbers are extracted by AI from each paper's full text and can be wrong; the paper is the authority. Data: results index of 2026-11-02, citation counts from OpenAlex (2026-10-09).

    Get the next scime Dispatch and a monthly field update

    Free. We send a confirmation link first; every email has a one-click unsubscribe. Privacy