Papers › MGTBench: Benchmarking Machine-Generated Text Detection

MGTBench: Benchmarking Machine-Generated Text Detection

26 Mar 2023arXiv:2303.14822archive 2025-07-28

Xinlei He, Xinyue Shen, Zeyuan Chen, Michael Backes, Yang Zhang

Nowadays, powerful large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT have demonstrated revolutionary power in a variety of tasks. Consequently, the detection of machine-generated texts (MGTs) is becoming increasingly crucial as LLMs become more advanced and prevalent. These models have the ability to generate human-like language, making it challenging to discern whether a text is authored by a human or a machine. This raises concerns regarding authenticity, accountability, and potential bias. However, existing methods for detecting MGTs are evaluated using different model architectures, datasets, and experimental settings, resulting in a lack of a comprehensive evaluation framework that encompasses various methodologies. Furthermore, it remains unclear how existing detection methods would perform against powerful LLMs. In this paper, we fill this gap by proposing the first benchmark framework for MGT detection against powerful LLMs, named MGTBench. Extensive evaluations on public datasets with curated texts generated by various powerful LLMs such as ChatGPT-turbo and Claude demonstrate the effectiveness of different detection methods. Our ablation study shows that a larger number of words in general leads to better performance and most detection methods can achieve similar performance with much fewer training samples. Moreover, we delve into a more challenging task: text attribution. Our findings indicate that the model-based detection methods still perform well in the text attribution task. To investigate the robustness of different detection methods, we consider three adversarial attacks, namely paraphrasing, random spacing, and adversarial perturbations. We discover that these attacks can significantly diminish detection effectiveness, underscoring the critical need for the development of more robust detection methods.

Code

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

26 samples harvested; 8 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 18 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-25; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

Licence: 0 of the 26 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from 3 repositories linked to this paper, official or community; each sample names its own and says which. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

Tasks

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections