Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41360832›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Classifying human vs. AI text with machine learning and explainable transformer models.

Adven Masih, Bushra Afzal, Shamyla Firdoos, Jabar Mahmood, Aitizaz Ali, Mohamed Shabbir Abdulnabi, Daniel Musafiri Balungu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Adven MasihFaculty of Computing and Information Technology, University of Sialkot, Daska Road, Sialkot, 51040, Punjab, Pakistan. adven.masih@uskt.edu.pk.
Bushra AfzalFaculty of Computing and Information Technology, University of Sialkot, Daska Road, Sialkot, 51040, Punjab, Pakistan.
Shamyla FirdoosFaculty of Computing and Information Technology, University of Sialkot, Daska Road, Sialkot, 51040, Punjab, Pakistan.
Jabar MahmoodState Key Laboratory of Blockchain and Data Security, School of Cyber Science and Technology, College of Computer Science and Technology, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, 310007, Zhejiang, China.
Aitizaz AliSchool of Technology (SOT), Asia Pacific University of Technology and Innovation (APU), Kuala Lumpur, 57000, Malaysia.
Mohamed Shabbir AbdulnabiSchool of Technology (SOT), Asia Pacific University of Technology and Innovation (APU), Kuala Lumpur, 57000, Malaysia. mohamed.shabbir@apu.edu.my.
Daniel Musafiri BalunguDepartment of Big Data Analytics and Video Analysis Methods, Ural Federal University, Yekaterinburg, 620002, Russia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The rapid proliferation of AI-generated text from models such as ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4 has raised critical challenges in verifying content authenticity and ensuring ethical use of language technologies. This study presents a comprehensive framework for distinguishing between human-written and GPT-generated text using a combination of machine learning, sequential deep learning, and transformer-based models. A balanced dataset of 20,000 samples was compiled, incorporating diverse linguistic and topical sources. Traditional algorithms and sequential architectures (LSTM, GRU, BiLSTM, BiGRU) were compared against advanced transformer models, including BERT, DistilBERT, ALBERT, and RoBERTa. Experimental findings revealed that RoBERTa achieved the highest performance (Accuracy = 96.1%), outperforming all baselines. Post-hoc temperature scaling (T = 1.476) improved calibration, while threshold tuning (t = 0.957) enhanced precision for high-stakes applications. McNemar's test with Holm correction confirmed the statistical significance (p < 0.05) of RoBERTa's superiority. Efficiency analysis showed optimal trade-offs between accuracy and latency, and 20% pruning demonstrated sustainability potential. Furthermore, LIME and SHAP explainability analyses highlighted linguistic distinctions between AI-generated and human-authored text, and fine-grained error evaluation confirmed model robustness across text lengths. In conclusion, RoBERTa emerges as a reliable, interpretable, and computationally efficient model for detecting AI-generated content.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceMachine LearningAlgorithmsHumansAI generated text detectionGPT-4Human-Generated textLarge language models (LLMs)Natural language processing (NLP)Recurrent deep learningText classificationTransformer models

Identifiers

PMID41360832
PMCPMC12686477

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.