2 ms·
Rather than try to detect if pieces were generated by AI, why not just check if they're plagiarized off the outputs of a bunch of popular models? We already hav
by bloppe 3y ago
Rather than try to detect if pieces were generated by AI, why not just check if they're plagiarized off the outputs of a bunch of popular models? We already have traditional plagiarism analysis methods, we just need a corpus of most of the recent outputs from the most popular LLM services to check against. OpenAI, Google, Anthropic, and any other LLM-as-a-service companies could profitably sell access to these corpora to third-party analysis services that compile them and offer search.
- ShamelessC 3y agoOne reason would be that LLM's don't tend to output verbatim pieces from their dataset (unless explicitly prompted to do so). This is made further complicated by the "temperature" setting allowing users to make output even more "creative" than its dataset. In OpenAI's case, its writing style usually comes from OpenAI's in-house dataset they used for RLHF. This is what gives it the ability to chat and respond with its signature (perhaps overly formal and apologetic) tone. Although it can be used to write in other styles, sometimes it will refuse to because of this.
- bloppe 3y agoYou misunderstand me. I'm not talking about detecting when LLM's plagiarize humans, but when humans "plagiarize" (copy from without attributing) LLM's.