aiqbench analysis
This research evaluates the robustness of keystroke dynamics for detecting LLM-assisted writing in Vietnamese, specifically addressing threats where users deliberately alter typing patterns to evade detection. By introducing behaviorally manipulated datasets and adversarial training, the study demonstrates that sequential models significantly outperform feature-based approaches but require exposure to diverse writing behaviors to maintain accuracy against paraphrasing and evasion tactics. The findings highlight a critical dependency on comprehensive threat modeling for reliable authentication systems in an era of generative AI.
Detecting LLM-Assisted Vietnamese Writing via Keystrokes under Behavioral Manipulation
arXiv:2610.07700v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We study the robustness of keystroke dynamics for detecting large language model (LLM)-assisted writing. We introduce a Vietnamese keystroke dataset capturing realistic writing modes, including bona fide composition, transcription, and paraphrasing. We also define a behaviorally grounded threat model in which users deliberately alter typing patterns. To implement the threat model, we create behaviorally manipulated variants of the data designed to evade keystroke-based detection. We evaluate four keystroke modeling approaches: temporal and rhythmic representations, and sequential representations modeled with a one-dimensional convolutional neural network (1D-CNN) and TypeNet, under user-independent and context-independent settings. The results show that sequential models outperform feature-based approaches in most cases and that keystroke signals encode discriminative information about the writing process. However, detection is not uniformly robust: transcription is reliably identified, while paraphrasing and adversarially manipulated samples are frequently misclassified as bona fide when not explicitly modeled. To address this, we incorporate adversarial training using behaviorally manipulated data, which substantially improves separability and robustness. These results suggest that keystroke-based detection depends critically on exposure to diverse writing behaviors, and that strong performance under limited conditions does not generalize to realistic or adversarial settings without targeted modeling.
Abstract:We study the robustness of keystroke dynamics for detecting large language model (LLM)-assisted writing. We introduce a Vietnamese keystroke dataset capturing realistic writing modes, including bona fide composition, transcription, and paraphrasing. We also define a behaviorally grounded threat model in which users deliberately alter typing patterns. To implement the threat model, we create behaviorally manipulated variants of the data designed to evade keystroke-based detection. We evaluate four keystroke modeling approaches: temporal and rhythmic representations, and sequential representations modeled with a one-dimensional convolutional neural network (1D-CNN) and TypeNet, under user-independent and context-independent settings. The results show that sequential models outperform feature-based approaches in most cases and that keystroke signals encode discriminative information about the writing process. However, detection is not uniformly robust: transcription is reliably identified, while paraphrasing and adversarially manipulated samples are frequently misclassified as bona fide when not explicitly modeled. To address this, we incorporate adversarial training using behaviorally manipulated data, which substantially improves separability and robustness. These results suggest that keystroke-based detection depends critically on exposure to diverse writing behaviors, and that strong performance under limited conditions does not generalize to realistic or adversarial settings without targeted modeling.
9 pages, 2 figures. Thanh Dong and An Ngo contributted equally. Accepted at the 2026 IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence (ICTAI 2026)
Computation and Language (cs.CL); Computers and Society (cs.CY)
arXiv:2610.07700 [cs.CL]
(or arXiv:2610.07700v1 [cs.CL] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.07700 arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 238 words
Related coverage

Implementing and Evaluating a Basic Per-Action Monitor for Safer Evals
METR · Sep 27, 2026

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

Brief independent investigation of agents’ behavior, reasoning and collaboration in the OpenAI / Hugging Face hacking incident
METR · Aug 26, 2026

Deconfusing Corrigibility
AI Alignment Forum · Oct 17, 2026