aiqbench analysis
This study demonstrates that interpretable stylometric features derived from lexical and grammatical patterns can effectively distinguish between human-authored and GPT-assisted student writing with high accuracy. By utilizing Random Forest classifiers and SHAP analysis, the research provides transparent insights into which specific text characteristics drive detection, offering a measurable signal for academic integrity tools without relying on external metadata.
Detecting GPT-Assisted Writing Using Interpretable Stylometric Features
arXiv:2609.26687v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Distinguishing GPT-assisted from independently authored student writing has become a critical challenge in academia. This paper evaluates the discriminative capability of interpretable stylometric features extracted solely from submitted text. Using data from 90 participants who wrote both independently and with ChatGPT assistance, we evaluate eight machine learning classifiers while keeping data from the same participant together during validation. On the held-out test set, Random Forest achieved an ROC-AUC of 0.87 and an F1-score of 0.84, with False Positive and False Negative rates of 22.2% and 11.1%, respectively. SHAP analysis shows that lexical and grammatical characteristics drive the resulting predictions. The findings suggest that transparent, text-intrinsic features provide measurable signal for detecting GPT-assisted writing.
Abstract:Distinguishing GPT-assisted from independently authored student writing has become a critical challenge in academia. This paper evaluates the discriminative capability of interpretable stylometric features extracted solely from submitted text. Using data from 90 participants who wrote both independently and with ChatGPT assistance, we evaluate eight machine learning classifiers while keeping data from the same participant together during validation. On the held-out test set, Random Forest achieved an ROC-AUC of 0.87 and an F1-score of 0.84, with False Positive and False Negative rates of 22.2% and 11.1%, respectively. SHAP analysis shows that lexical and grammatical characteristics drive the resulting predictions. The findings suggest that transparent, text-intrinsic features provide measurable signal for detecting GPT-assisted writing.
Computation and Language (cs.CL); Computers and Society (cs.CY)
I.2.7; I.2.6; I.5.4
arXiv:2609.26687 [cs.CL]
(or arXiv:2609.26687v1 [cs.CL] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.26687 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 215 words
Related coverage

[AINews] Reality Checks on AI News (Yegge shuts down Gas Town, Databricks’ +60% Astra cost)
Latent Space · Sep 17, 2026
[AINews] High Taste Testers Ep. 1
Latent Space · Oct 17, 2026

[AINews] not much happened today
Latent Space · Sep 18, 2026

A Candid Abacus AI Review: The All-in-One AI Platform for Professionals & Enterprises
KDnuggets · Sep 10, 2026