sfhsrtjn t1_j4w5dy0 wrote
Please be aware of this one as well:
>Edward Tian's app at GPTZero.me
Also cannot vouch for this, just trying to be a bit helpful :)
Acceptable-Cress-374 t1_j4wcavd wrote
I tested this with text-davinci-03.
Prompt: Write a post about liking fruity icecream, in the style of a reddit post. Make some minor grammar mistakes while writing the post.
> hey everyone, so I'm totally loving this fruity icecream lately! I got it from a store near my house and its been so good. Its really sweet but not overly sickeningly sweet, like some other ice cream. Plus the fact that its fruity makes it even better in my opinion. Does anyone else like fruity icecream too? It'd be awesome to hear some of your thoughts on it!
This site gave me this:
> Your text is likely human generated!
feloneouscat t1_j65vzjx wrote
>Make some minor grammar mistakes while writing the post.
Huh. So you told it to do something it wouldn’t ordinarily do.
This seems akin to salesman who took a sledge to a product and then argued that it breaks in the field (true story). When you leave that off, does the paragraph get caught? Or did you muck about to find something that assured it would think it was human generated?
Acceptable-Cress-374 t1_j67w859 wrote
That was my first try. I went with the gut feeling that any training that they used for their model would assume bland prompts. I made mine different, and got 97% human generated the first try. Someone else mentioned other things that you could do, like mess around with temperature and such. Those work as well.
junetwentyfirst2020 t1_j4wcwxz wrote
It’s important to remember that these models are statistically robust. So while you may get a false positive or false negative, it does not reflect on the robustness of the model.
seventyducks t1_j4zvo3n wrote
Where are the benchmarks and analyses that you're basing this statement on?
[deleted] t1_j4z5kat wrote
[removed]
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments