"I know myself better, but not really greatly": Using LLMs to Detect and Explain LLM-Generated Texts

Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capabilities in generating human-like texts, but the potential misuse of such LLM-generated texts raises the need to distinguish between human-generated and LLM-generated content. This paper explores the detection and explanation capabilities of LLM-based detectors of LLM-generated texts, in the context of a binary classification task (human-generated texts vs LLM-generated texts) and a ternary classification task (human-generated texts, LLM-generated texts, and undecided). By evaluating on six close/open-source LLMs with different sizes, our findings reveal that while self-detection consistently outperforms cross-detection, i.e., LLMs can detect texts generated by themselves more accurately than those generated by other LLMs, the performance of self-detection is still far from ideal, indicating that further improvements are needed. We also show that extending the binary to the ternary classification task with a new class "Undecided" can enhance both detection accuracy and explanation quality, with improvements being statistically significant and consistent across all LLMs. We finally conducted comprehensive qualitative and quantitative analyses on the explanation errors, which are categorized into three types: reliance on inaccurate features (the most frequent error), hallucinations, and incorrect reasoning. These findings with our human-annotated dataset emphasize the need for further research into improving both self-detection and self-explanation, particularly to address overfitting issues that may hinder generalization.