Large Language Models (LLMs), such as GPT-3 and BERT, reshape how textual content is written and communicated. These models have the potential to generate scientific content that is indistinguishable from that written by humans. Hence, LLMs carry severe consequences for the scientific community, which relies on the integrity and reliability of publications. This research paper presents a novel ChatGPT-generated scientific text detection method, AI-Catcher. AI-Catcher integrates two deep learning models, multilayer perceptron (MLP) and convolutional neural networks (CNN). The MLP learns the feature representations of the linguistic and statistical features. The CNN extracts high-level representations of the sequential patterns from the textual content. AI-Catcher is a multimodal model that fuses hidden patterns derived from MLP and CNN. In addition, a new ChatGPT-Generated scientific text dataset is collected to enhance AI-generated text detection tools, AIGTxt. AIGTxt contains 3000 records collected from published academic articles across ten domains and divided into three classes: Human-written, ChatGPT-generated, and Mixed text. Several experiments are conducted to evaluate the performance of AI-Catcher. The comparative results demonstrate the capability of AI-Catcher to distinguish between human-written and ChatGPT-generated scientific text more accurately than alternative methods. On average, AI-Catcher improved accuracy by 37.4%.

The remarkable capabilities of large-scale language models, such as ChatGPT, in text generation have impressed readers and spurred researchers to devise detectors to mitigate potential risks, including misinformation, phishing, and academic dishonesty. Despite this, most previous studies have been predominantly geared towards creating detectors that differentiate between purely ChatGPT-generated texts and human-authored texts. This approach, however, fails to work on discerning texts generated through human-machine collaboration, such as ChatGPT-polished texts. Addressing this gap, we introduce a novel dataset termed HPPT (ChatGPT-polished academic abstracts), facilitating the construction of more robust detectors. It diverges from extant corpora by comprising pairs of human-written and ChatGPT-polished abstracts instead of purely ChatGPT-generated texts. Additionally, we propose the "Polish Ratio" method, an innovative measure of the degree of modification made by ChatGPT compared to the original human-written text. It provides a mechanism to measure the degree of ChatGPT influence in the resulting text. Our experimental results show our proposed model has better robustness on the HPPT dataset and two existing datasets (HC3 and CDB). Furthermore, the "Polish Ratio" we proposed offers a more comprehensive explanation by quantifying the degree of ChatGPT involvement.

While recent advancements in the capabilities and widespread accessibility of generative language models, such as ChatGPT (OpenAI, 2022), have brought about various benefits by generating fluent human-like text, the task of distinguishing between human- and large language model (LLM) generated text has emerged as a crucial problem. These models can potentially deceive by generating artificial text that appears to be human-generated. This issue is particularly significant in domains such as law, education, and science, where ensuring the integrity of text is of the utmost importance. This survey provides an overview of the current approaches employed to differentiate between texts generated by humans and ChatGPT. We present an account of the different datasets constructed for detecting ChatGPT-generated text, the various methods utilized, what qualitative analyses into the characteristics of human versus ChatGPT-generated text have been performed, and finally, summarize our findings into general insights

In recent times, significant advancements have been witnessed in the field of language models, particularly with the emergence of Large Language Models (LLMs) that are trained on vast amounts of data extracted from internet archives. These LLMs, such as ChatGPT, have become widely accessible, allowing users to generate text for various purposes including articles, essays, jokes, and poetry. Given that LLMs are trained on a diverse range of text sources, encompassing platforms like Reddit and Twitter, it is foreseeable that future training datasets will also incorporate text generated by previous iterations of the models themselves. In light of this development, our research aims to investigate the influence of artificial text in the pre-training phase of language models. Specifically, we conducted a comparative analysis between a language model, RoBERTa, pre-trained using CNN/DailyMail news articles, and ChatGPT, which employed the same articles for its training and evaluated their performance on three downstream tasks as well as their potential gender bias, using sentiment analysis as a metric. Through a series of experiments, we demonstrate that the utilization of artificial text during pre-training does not have a significant impact on either the performance of the models in downstream tasks or their gender bias. In conclusion, our findings suggest that the inclusion of text generated by LLMs in their own pre-training process does not yield substantial effects on the subsequent performance of the models in downstream tasks or their potential gender bias.

Recent advances in generative pre-trained transformer large language models have emphasised the potential risks of unfair use of artificial intelligence (AI) generated content in an academic environment and intensified efforts in searching for solutions to detect such content. The paper examines the general functionality of detection tools for artificial intelligence generated text and evaluates them based on accuracy and error type analysis. Specifically, the study seeks to answer research questions about whether existing detection tools can reliably differentiate between human-written text and ChatGPT-generated text, and whether machine translation and content obfuscation techniques affect the detection of AI-generated text. The research covers 12 publicly available tools and two commercial systems (Turnitin and PlagiarismCheck) that are widely used in the academic setting. The researchers conclude that the available detection tools are neither accurate nor reliable and have a main bias towards classifying the output as human-written rather than detecting AI-generated text. Furthermore, content obfuscation techniques significantly worsen the performance of tools. The study makes several significant contributions. First, it summarises up-to-date similar scientific and non-scientific efforts in the field. Second, it presents the result of one of the most comprehensive tests conducted so far, based on a rigorous research methodology, an original document set, and a broad coverage of tools. Third, it discusses the implications and drawbacks of using detection tools for AI-generated text in academic settings.

Advances in natural language processing (NLP) have been driven mainly by scaling up the size of pre-trained language models, along with the amount of data and compute required for training (Raffel et al., 2020; Radford et al., 2019; Rae et al., 2021; Fedus et al., 2021; Hoffmann et al., 2022). OpenAI recently released ChatGPT, a text generation model with conversational capabilities. The model is based on GPT3.5 which is a version of GPT3 (Brown et al., 2020) first fine-tuned on code then fine-tuned using Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) (Christiano et al., 2017; Stiennon et al., 2020), a method previously demonstrated by OpenAI with Instruct-GPT (Ouyang et al., 2022). This fine-tuning process contributes not only to the model's knowledge but also simplifies the model's interface compared to GPT3, which necessitated substantial prompt engineering to achieve satisfactory outcomes, and hence facilitating the extraction and application of that built-in knowledge. As a result of these significant performance improvements, ChatGPT and other large language models have gained much popularity in the media and in the social context, often without fully understanding the underlying limitations of the models - e.g., the possibility of generating hateful, hateful, toxic, or disrespectful content (Bender et al., 2021; McGuffie & Newhouse, 2020; Weidinger et al., 2021). Another potential misuse of LLMs or ChatGPT is industrializing radicalization and harmful propaganda which poses a significant and unconventional threat to civil society. In response to the mounting concerns surrounding potential misuse, numerous researchers are now exploring various strategies to mitigate associated risks.

ChatGPT has become a global sensation. As ChatGPT and other Large Language Models (LLMs) emerge, concerns of misusing them in various ways increase, such as disseminating fake news, plagiarism, manipulating public opinion, cheating, and fraud. Hence, distinguishing AI-generated from human-generated becomes increasingly essential. Researchers have proposed various detection methodologies, ranging from basic binary classifiers to more complex deep-learning models. Some detection techniques rely on statistical characteristics or syntactic patterns, while others incorporate semantic or contextual information to improve accuracy. The primary objective of this study is to provide a comprehensive and contemporary assessment of the most recent techniques in ChatGPT detection. Additionally, we evaluated other AI-generated text detection tools that do not specifically claim to detect ChatGPT-generated content to assess their performance in detecting ChatGPT-generated content. For our evaluation, we have curated a benchmark dataset consisting of prompts from ChatGPT and humans, including diverse questions from medical, open Q&A, and finance domains and user-generated responses from popular social networking platforms. The dataset serves as a reference to assess the performance of various techniques in detecting ChatGPT-generated content. Our evaluation results demonstrate that none of the existing methods can effectively detect ChatGPT-generated content.

ChatGPT has the ability to generate grammatically flawless and seemingly-human replies to different types of questions from various domains. The number of its users and of its applications is growing at an unprecedented rate. Unfortunately, use and abuse come hand in hand. In this paper, we study whether a machine learning model can be effectively trained to accurately distinguish between original human and seemingly human (that is, ChatGPT-generated) text, especially when this text is short. Furthermore, we employ an explainable artificial intelligence framework to gain insight into the reasoning behind the model trained to differentiate between ChatGPT-generated and human-generated text. The goal is to analyze model's decisions and determine if any specific patterns or characteristics can be identified. Our study focuses on short online reviews, conducting two experiments comparing human-generated and ChatGPT-generated text. The first experiment involves ChatGPT text generated from custom queries, while the second experiment involves text generated by rephrasing original human-generated reviews. We fine-tune a Transformer-based model and use it to make predictions, which are then explained using SHAP. We compare our model with a perplexity score-based approach and find that disambiguation between human and ChatGPT-generated reviews is more challenging for the ML model when using rephrased text. However, our proposed approach still achieves an accuracy of 79%. Using explainability, we observe that ChatGPT's writing is polite, without specific details, using fancy and atypical vocabulary, impersonal, and typically it does not express feelings.