IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0335369.html

Stylometry can reveal artificial intelligence authorship, but humans struggle: A comparison of human and seven large language models in Japanese

Author

Listed:
  • Wataru Zaitsu
  • Mingzhe Jin
  • Shunichi Ishihara
  • Satoru Tsuge
  • Mitsuyuki Inaba

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to estimate the artificial intelligence (AI) detection potential using stylometric analysis in Study 1 and examine the AI detection abilities of humans in Study 2. In Study 1, we compared 100 human-written public comments with 350 texts generated by seven large language models (LLMs) (ChatGPT [GPT-4o and o1], Claude3.5, Gemini, Microsoft Copilot, Llama3.1, and Perplexity) using multidimensional scaling (MDS) to visualize differences by focusing on three stylometric features (phrase patterns, part-of-speech bigrams, and unigrams of function words). In general, each stylometric feature can distinguish between LLM-generated and human-written texts. In particular, three integrated stylometric features achieved perfect discrimination on MDS dimensions. Interestingly, only Llama3.1 exhibited distinct characteristics compared with the other six LLMs. The random forest classifier also achieved 99.8% accuracy. In Study 2, we performed an online survey to assess the Japanese participants’ AI detection abilities by presenting LLM-generated and human-written texts, as used in Study 1. 403 participants tackled “AI or Human” judgment task and estimated their own confidence, revealing that overall human AI-detection ability was limited. Moreover, in our materials, more advanced ChatGPT(o1), plausibly reflecting relatively greater fluency and polish, tends to mislead the participants to believe “human-written” texts compared with ChatGPT(GPT-4o) and improves their confidence for their own judgments. Furthermore, an additional comment from the survey suggested that participants primarily relied on superficial impressions based on phraseology, expression, the ends of words, conjunctions, and punctuation marks in judgments. These findings have important implications for various scenarios, including public policy, education, and marketing, where the rapid and reliable detection of AI-generated content is increasing.

Suggested Citation

  • Wataru Zaitsu & Mingzhe Jin & Shunichi Ishihara & Satoru Tsuge & Mitsuyuki Inaba, 2025. "Stylometry can reveal artificial intelligence authorship, but humans struggle: A comparison of human and seven large language models in Japanese," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(10), pages 1-18, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0335369
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0335369
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0335369
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0335369&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0335369?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0335369. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.