Sem-Detect: Semantic Level Detection of AI Generated Peer-Reviews
André Duarte, Brian Tufts, Aditya Oke, Fei Fang, Arlindo Oliveira, Lei Li
Abstract
How can we distinguish whether a peer review was written by a human or generated by an AI model? We argue that, in this setting, authorship should not be attributed solely from the textual features of a review, but also from the ideas, judgments, and claims it expresses. To this end, we propose Sem-Detect, an authorship detection method for peer reviews that operationalizes this principle by combining textual features with claim-level semantic analysis. Sem-Detect compares a target review against multiple AI-generated reviews of the same paper, leveraging the observation that different AI models tend to converge on similar points, while human reviewers introduce more unique and diverse ones. As a result, Sem-Detect is able to distinguish fully AI reviews from authentic human-written ones, including those that have been refined using an LLM but still reflect human judgment. Across a dataset of over 20,000 peer reviews from ICLR and NeurIPS conferences, Sem-Detect improves over the strongest baseline by 25.5% in TPR@0.1% FPR in the binary setting. Moreover, in the three-class scenario, we empirically show that LLM refinement preserves the semantic signals of human reviews, which remain distinct from the patterns exhibited by fully AI-generated text; as a result, fewer than 3.5% of LLM-refined human reviews are misclassified as AI-generated. Sem-Detect enables legitimate use of LLMs in writing while preserving the intellectual integrity of peer review.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext ea2f5a04-2d0c-455c-bbe6-a6979b231816Builds on11
- DetectGPT: Zero-Shot Machine-Generated Text Detection using Probability CurvatureEric Mitchell, Yoonho Lee, Alexander Khazatsky, Christopher D. Manning et al.ICML 2023 · 988 citations
- A Watermark for Large Language ModelsJohn Kirchenbauer, Jonas Geiping, Yuxin Wen, Jonathan Katz et al.ICML 2023 · 854 citations
- RADAR: Robust AI-Text Detection via Adversarial LearningXiaomeng Hu, Pin-Yu Chen, Tsung-Yi HoNeurIPS 2023 · 315 citations
- Fast-DetectGPT: Efficient Zero-Shot Detection of Machine-Generated Text via Conditional Probability CurvatureGuangsheng Bao, Yanbin Zhao, Zhiyang Teng, Linyi Yang et al.ICLR 2024 · 311 citations
- Spotting LLMs With Binoculars: Zero-Shot Detection of Machine-Generated TextAbhimanyu Hans, Avi Schwarzschild, Valeriia Cherepanova, Hamid Kazemi et al.ICML 2024 · 262 citations
Related papers
- Is Your Paper Being Reviewed by an LLM? Benchmarking AI Text Detection in Peer ReviewSungduk Yu, Man Luo, Avinash Madasu, Vasudev Lal et al.ICLR 2026 · 24 citations
- Policies Permitting LLM Use for Polishing Peer Reviews Are Currently Not EnforceableRounak Saha, Gurusha Juneja, Dayita Chaudhuri, Naveeja Sajeevan et al.ICML 2026 · 3 citations
- CoCoNUTS: Concentrating on Content while Neglecting Uninformative Textual Styles for AI-Generated Peer Review DetectionYihan Chen, Jiawei Chen, Guozhao Mo, Xuanang Chen et al.ACL 2026 · 1 citation
- Monitoring AI-Modified Content at Scale: A Case Study on the Impact of ChatGPT on AI Conference Peer ReviewsWeixin Liang, Zachary Izzo, Yaohui Zhang, Haley Lepp et al.ICML 2024 · 213 citations
- The AI Review Lottery: Widespread AI-Assisted Peer Reviews Boost Paper Scores and Acceptance RatesGiuseppe Russo, Manoel Horta Ribeiro, Tim R. Davidson, Veniamin Veselovsky et al.CSCW 2025 · 10 citations
