免费人工智能检测工具在检测人工智能生成文本方面的灵敏度如何?热门人工智能检测工具比较

IF 1.9 Q3 PSYCHIATRY
Sujita Kumar Kar, Teena Bansal, Sumit Modi, Amit Singh
{"title":"免费人工智能检测工具在检测人工智能生成文本方面的灵敏度如何?热门人工智能检测工具比较","authors":"Sujita Kumar Kar, Teena Bansal, Sumit Modi, Amit Singh","doi":"10.1177/02537176241247934","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background:Recently, Artificial intelligence (AI) has significantly influenced academic writing. We aimed to investigate the sensitivity of the free versions of popular AI-detection software programs in detecting AI-generated text.Methods:We searched for AI-content-detection software on Google and selected the first 10 free versions that allowed a minimum of 500 words for text analysis. Then, we gave ChatGPT 3.5 version a command to generate a scientific article on the “Role of Electroconvulsive Therapy (ECT) in Treatment-resistant Depression” under 500 words. After generating the primary text, we rephrased it using three different software tools. We then used AI-detection software to analyse the original and paraphrase texts.Results:10 AI-detector tools were tested on their ability to detect AI-generated text. The sensitivity ranged from 0% to 100%. 5 out of 10 tools detected AI-generated content with 100% accuracy. For paraphrased texts, Sapling and Undetectable AI detected all three software-generated contents with 100% accuracy. Meanwhile, Copyleaks, QuillBot, and Wordtune identified content generated by two software programs with 100% accuracy.Conclusion:The integration of AI technology in academic writing is becoming more prevalent. Nonetheless, relying solely on AI-generated content can diminish the author’s credibility, leading most academic journals to suggest limiting its use. AI-content-detection software programs have been developed to detect AI-generated or AI-assisted texts. Currently, some of the platforms are equally sensitive. However, future upgrades may enhance their ability to detect AI-generated text more accurately.","PeriodicalId":13476,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How Sensitive Are the Free AI-detector Tools in Detecting AI-generated Texts? A Comparison of Popular AI-detector Tools\",\"authors\":\"Sujita Kumar Kar, Teena Bansal, Sumit Modi, Amit Singh\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/02537176241247934\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background:Recently, Artificial intelligence (AI) has significantly influenced academic writing. We aimed to investigate the sensitivity of the free versions of popular AI-detection software programs in detecting AI-generated text.Methods:We searched for AI-content-detection software on Google and selected the first 10 free versions that allowed a minimum of 500 words for text analysis. Then, we gave ChatGPT 3.5 version a command to generate a scientific article on the “Role of Electroconvulsive Therapy (ECT) in Treatment-resistant Depression” under 500 words. After generating the primary text, we rephrased it using three different software tools. We then used AI-detection software to analyse the original and paraphrase texts.Results:10 AI-detector tools were tested on their ability to detect AI-generated text. The sensitivity ranged from 0% to 100%. 5 out of 10 tools detected AI-generated content with 100% accuracy. For paraphrased texts, Sapling and Undetectable AI detected all three software-generated contents with 100% accuracy. Meanwhile, Copyleaks, QuillBot, and Wordtune identified content generated by two software programs with 100% accuracy.Conclusion:The integration of AI technology in academic writing is becoming more prevalent. Nonetheless, relying solely on AI-generated content can diminish the author’s credibility, leading most academic journals to suggest limiting its use. AI-content-detection software programs have been developed to detect AI-generated or AI-assisted texts. Currently, some of the platforms are equally sensitive. However, future upgrades may enhance their ability to detect AI-generated text more accurately.\",\"PeriodicalId\":13476,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/02537176241247934\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02537176241247934","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:最近,人工智能(AI)对学术写作产生了重大影响。方法:我们在谷歌上搜索了人工智能内容检测软件,并选择了前10个允许至少500字文本分析的免费版本。然后,我们向 ChatGPT 3.5 版本发出指令,要求生成一篇 500 字以内的科学文章,主题为 "电休克疗法(ECT)在耐药抑郁症中的作用"。生成主要文本后,我们使用三种不同的软件工具对其进行了重新措辞。结果:我们测试了 10 种人工智能检测工具检测人工智能生成文本的能力。灵敏度从 0% 到 100% 不等。在 10 个工具中,有 5 个工具以 100% 的准确率检测到了人工智能生成的内容。对于转述文本,Sapling 和 Undetectable AI 以 100% 的准确率检测出了所有三种软件生成的内容。同时,Copyleaks、QuillBot 和 Wordtune 能以 100% 的准确率识别出由两个软件生成的内容。然而,完全依赖人工智能生成的内容可能会降低作者的可信度,因此大多数学术期刊建议限制其使用。人们开发了人工智能内容检测软件来检测人工智能生成或人工智能辅助的文本。目前,一些平台的灵敏度不相上下。不过,未来的升级可能会增强它们更准确地检测人工智能生成文本的能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
How Sensitive Are the Free AI-detector Tools in Detecting AI-generated Texts? A Comparison of Popular AI-detector Tools
Background:Recently, Artificial intelligence (AI) has significantly influenced academic writing. We aimed to investigate the sensitivity of the free versions of popular AI-detection software programs in detecting AI-generated text.Methods:We searched for AI-content-detection software on Google and selected the first 10 free versions that allowed a minimum of 500 words for text analysis. Then, we gave ChatGPT 3.5 version a command to generate a scientific article on the “Role of Electroconvulsive Therapy (ECT) in Treatment-resistant Depression” under 500 words. After generating the primary text, we rephrased it using three different software tools. We then used AI-detection software to analyse the original and paraphrase texts.Results:10 AI-detector tools were tested on their ability to detect AI-generated text. The sensitivity ranged from 0% to 100%. 5 out of 10 tools detected AI-generated content with 100% accuracy. For paraphrased texts, Sapling and Undetectable AI detected all three software-generated contents with 100% accuracy. Meanwhile, Copyleaks, QuillBot, and Wordtune identified content generated by two software programs with 100% accuracy.Conclusion:The integration of AI technology in academic writing is becoming more prevalent. Nonetheless, relying solely on AI-generated content can diminish the author’s credibility, leading most academic journals to suggest limiting its use. AI-content-detection software programs have been developed to detect AI-generated or AI-assisted texts. Currently, some of the platforms are equally sensitive. However, future upgrades may enhance their ability to detect AI-generated text more accurately.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
7.10%
发文量
116
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine (ISSN 0253-7176) was started in 1978 as the official publication of the Indian Psychiatric Society South Zonal Branch. The journal allows free access (Open Access) and is published Bimonthly. The Journal includes but is not limited to review articles, original research, opinions, and letters. The Editor and publisher accept no legal responsibility for any opinions, omissions or errors by the authors, nor do they approve of any product advertised within the journal.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信