Aug 2026· Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research· Vol 16, pp. 38145-38151· 0 citations· 27 references
TL;DR
This systematic literature review synthesizes peer-reviewed and high-quality studies published between 2023 and 2026 on AI-obfuscated, AI-refined, and humanized text and suggests that AI-text detection should be treated as one supportive signal rather than a stand-alone judgment, particularly in high-stakes academic or professional contexts.
Abstract
Large Language Models (LLMs) are now widely used to draft, revise, paraphrase, and polish text, making the detection of AI-generated writing increasingly difficult. This systematic literature review synthesizes peer-reviewed and high-quality studies published between 2023 and 2026 on AI-obfuscated, AI-refined, and humanized text. From 1,002 records, 26 primary studies were retained after screening and quality assessment. The review organizes the literature through a seven-dimensional taxonomy. Overall, the evidence shows that many detectors perform well on clean or in-distribution AI-text but become less reliable when the text is paraphrased, humanized, or collaboratively edited. The review also highlights recurring fairness concerns, especially for non-native English writers, and finds that current benchmarks often do not fully capture realistic mixed-authorship and adversarial settings. These results suggest that AI-text detection should be treated as one supportive signal rather than a stand-alone judgment, particularly in high-stakes academic or professional contexts.
It is concluded that AI-text detection, in its current form, cannot serve as a sole, dispositive basis for academic-integrity decisions, and a set of institutional and technical recommendations are proposed that better address the underlying problem than detector accuracy alone can.
A. Kumar, Ayush Kumar, Danish Maqbool Chopan· International Journal of Res...· 0 citations
With the widespread adoption of large language models in academic writing, the detection of artificial intelligence-generated content has become an important research topic. This paper reviews the detection of AI-generated text in academic papers. It defines the relevant concepts, surveys detection methods and commerci...
Institutions use commercial AI detectors for academic integrity, yet detectors cannot distinguish AI editing from full LLM drafts and may treat both as misconduct. In a controlled study of published English abstracts (four domains; 2013 to 2015 vs. 2023 to 2025), we quantify this policy failure under proxy human/AI lab...
Jonathan A. Karr, Grigorii Khvatskii, Hua Ting et al.· 0 citations
Dear Editor,
The rapid integration of AI into academic writing has necessitated tools for detecting AI-generated content such as iThenticate ZeroGPT, Turnitin, Phrasly AI, Open AI text Classifier, Writer, Copy leaks to differentiate between human and machine-generated text.1 However, current AI detection tools suffer f...
Plagiarism-detection and AI-detection tools are now widely used in academic publishing. These systems were introduced to support research integrity by helping journals identify potential plagiarism, inappropriate text reuse, and concerns related to undisclosed use of artificial intelligence (AI). When used appropriatel...
The proposed Recursive Self-Correction approach raises model performance from a Political Neutrality Likert scale baseline of 2.14 to 4.56, averaged across all models, demonstrating effective inference-time mitigation of political bias in LLM-generated summaries.
Tejaswi V. Panchagnula, Bruce Coburn, Bryce J. Dietrich et al.· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.