惯性聚合 高效追踪和阅读你感兴趣的博客、新闻、科技资讯
阅读原文 在惯性聚合中打开

推荐订阅源

博客园 - 三生石上(FineUI控件)
freeCodeCamp Programming Tutorials: Python, JavaScript, Git & More
月光博客
月光博客
博客园 - 【当耐特】
Hugging Face - Blog
Hugging Face - Blog
让小产品的独立变现更简单 - ezindie.com
让小产品的独立变现更简单 - ezindie.com
爱范儿
爱范儿
大猫的无限游戏
大猫的无限游戏
S
SegmentFault 最新的问题
博客园_首页
雷峰网
雷峰网
量子位
有赞技术团队
有赞技术团队
博客园 - 叶小钗
博客园 - 聂微东
V
V2EX
OSCHINA 社区最新新闻
OSCHINA 社区最新新闻
博客园 - 司徒正美
小众软件
小众软件
The Cloudflare Blog
阮一峰的网络日志
阮一峰的网络日志
Apple Machine Learning Research
Apple Machine Learning Research
Jina AI
Jina AI
人人都是产品经理
人人都是产品经理

cs.CL updates on arXiv.org

Playing Along: Learning a Double-Agent Defender for Belief Steering via Theory of Mind RPA-Check: A Multi-Stage Automated Framework for Evaluating Dynamic LLM-based Role-Playing Agents A Triadic Suffix Tokenization Scheme for Numerical Reasoning Hidden Measurement Error in LLM Pipelines Distorts Annotation, Evaluation, and Benchmarking Synthius-Mem: Brain-Inspired Hallucination-Resistant Persona Memory Achieving 94.4% Memory Accuracy and 99.6% Adversarial Robustness on LoCoMo Time is Not a Label: Continuous Phase Rotation for Temporal Knowledge Graphs and Agentic Memory NovBench: Evaluating Large Language Models on Academic Paper Novelty Assessment Policy Split: Incentivizing Dual-Mode Exploration in LLM Reinforcement with Dual-Mode Entropy Regularization METER: Evaluating Multi-Level Contextual Causal Reasoning in Large Language Models Think Before you Write: QA-Guided Reasoning for Character Descriptions in Books METRO: Towards Strategy Induction from Expert Dialogue Transcripts for Non-collaborative Dialogues Retrieval as Generation: A Unified Framework with Self-Triggered Information Planning Do LLMs Know Tool Irrelevance? Demystifying Structural Alignment Bias in Tool Invocations Enhancing Multimodal Large Language Models for Ancient Chinese Character Evolution Analysis via Glyph-Driven Fine-Tuning Polyglot Teachers: Evaluating Language Models for Multilingual Synthetic Data Generation Exploring Knowledge Conflicts for Faithful LLM Reasoning: Benchmark and Method CocoaBench: Evaluating Unified Digital Agents in the Wild MathAgent: Adversarial Evolution of Constraint Graphs for Mathematical Reasoning Data Synthesis Evaluating Memory Capability in Continuous Lifelog Scenario How Robust Are Large Language Models for Clinical Numeracy? An Empirical Study on Numerical Reasoning Abilities in Clinical Contexts Efficient Training for Cross-lingual Speech Language Models Shared Emotion Geometry Across Small Language Models: A Cross-Architecture Study of Representation, Behavior, and Methodological Confounds A Systematic Analysis of the Impact of Persona Steering on LLM Capabilities Uncertainty-Aware Web-Conditioned Scientific Fact-Checking When Valid Signals Fail: Regime Boundaries Between LLM Features and RL Trading Policies When Verification Fails: How Compositionally Infeasible Claims Escape Rejection Mem$^2$Evolve: Towards Self-Evolving Agents via Co-Evolutionary Capability Expansion and Experience Distillation AOP-Smart: A RAG-Enhanced Large Language Model Framework for Adverse Outcome Pathway Analysis OccuBench: Evaluating AI Agents on Real-World Professional Tasks via Language Environment Simulation Advancing Polish Language Modeling through Tokenizer Optimization in the Bielik v3 7B and 11B Series
A Training-free Method for LLM Text Attribution
Tara Radvand, Mojtaba Abdolmaleki, Mohamed Mostagir, Ambuj Tewar · 2025-01-05 · via cs.CL updates on arXiv.org

Verifying the provenance of content is crucial to the functioning of many organizations, e.g., educational institutions, social media platforms, and firms. This problem is becoming increasingly challenging as text generated by Large Language Models (LLMs) becomes almost indistinguishable from human-generated content. In addition, many institutions use in-house LLMs and want to ensure that external, non-sanctioned LLMs do not produce content within their institutions. In this paper, we answer the following question: Given a piece of text, can we identify whether it was produced by a particular LLM, while ensuring a guaranteed low false positive rate? We model LLM text as a sequential stochastic process with complete dependence on history. We then design zero-shot statistical tests to (i) distinguish between text generated by two different known sets of LLMs $A$ (non-sanctioned) and $B$ (in-house), and (ii) identify whether text was generated by a known LLM or by any unknown model. We prove that the Type I and Type II errors of our test decrease exponentially with the length of the text. We also extend our theory to black-box access via sampling and characterize the required sample size to obtain essentially the same Type I and Type II error upper bounds as in the white-box setting (i.e., with access to $A$). We show the tightness of our upper bounds by providing an information-theoretic lower bound. We next present numerical experiments to validate our theoretical results and assess their robustness in settings with adversarial post-editing. Our work has a host of practical applications in which determining the origin of a text is important and can also be useful for combating misinformation and ensuring compliance with emerging AI regulations. See https://github.com/TaraRadvand74/llm-text-detection for code, data, and an online demo of the project.