Comment by jszymborski

In fairness, the original crop of detectors were based on perplexity scores and were entirely useless (famously, the declaration of independence often came back as 100% AI generated).

I'm not convinced we'll ever have full-proof detectors, and certainly the false-positive rate will make them irresponsible for accusations of intellectual/academic fraud, I do think that LLMs are easy for folks to sniff out on average so I imagine it's possible to detect many instances.

Pangram's detector is anecdotally very accurate in my tests. This detector appears to be fine-tuned on a very small dataset (200 papers per subject), and suspect the problem might be in part that.