aifollow.news Search
Back Rohan Paul
Rohan Paul· @rohanpaul_ai · X· · Original publication time AI score60

Study finds newer models can cause AI-text detectors to miss rewritten abstractsMachine translation

Automatically verified and published · Generated and evidence-checked automatically; not reviewed by a human.

AI introduction

A Tokyo Metropolitan University study found that AI-text detection results vary by the model used for rewriting. One set of detectors caught over 99% of rewrites before a model generation change but only 3.8% afterward. Pangram missed 79.8% of scientific abstracts rewritten by Meta's Muse-Glimmer. Organizations using such tools to screen papers should retest them after model releases.

Article · Original

The article text is unavailable in this language; an existing version is shown.

@rohanpaul_ai

This paper finds that AI-text detectors trained on a vendor's older models caught over 99% of rewrites before a generation change and only 3.8% after it.

Detectors that screen scientific papers for AI writing can stop working when a new LLM generation arrives, so anyone relying on them should re-test them with every model release.

QuoteRohan Paul@rohanpaul_ai
Pangram, the AI-text detector, missed 79.8% of scientific abstracts rewritten by Meta's Muse-Glimmer, while flagging just 1 of 5,000 human abstracts. In a new paper from Tokyo Metropolitan University, reseaerchers find the share of AI-rewritten abstracts that Pangram misses depends strongly on the LLM version Shows that it caught 93.5% of GPT-5 rewrites but missed 79.8% from another new model. Its miss rate depended mostly on which model did the rewriting.
View this post on X ↗

来源:Rohan Paul · x.com

Research
Found an error? Send a correction