WeSearch
Show HN: Reproducing three AI text detectors, and why filtering hurt my model

Show HN: Reproducing three AI text detectors, and why filtering hurt my model

·2 min read · 0 reactions · 0 comments · 12 views
More from GitHub ai Compare coverage Trending Talk Blindspots Daily Sources Live wire
TL;DR · WeSearch summary

A new open-source package allows researchers to reproduce an experiment comparing three AI text detectors for identifying AI-written movie reviews. The repository includes scripts to evaluate detector performance and assess how filtering affects downstream sentiment classification tasks. It also provides tools to audit a 2019 Mendeley dataset to verify the human origin of the source reviews used in the study.

Key facts
About this source

Hacker News (AI / LLM) files mainly under ai. We currently carry 8,030 of its stories.

Original article
GitHub
Read full at GitHub →

Story provenance

Source · retrieval · rights · ranking — open for full record
inspect →

Attribution is not the same as permission. This drawer separates discovery metadata, excerpts, WeSearch-generated summaries, reuse status, and whether the publisher receives the visit. Nothing here claims a legal grant the publisher has not made.

Record

Original publisherGitHub
Canonical URLhttps://github.com/abduldattijo/ai-slop-detection-reproduction
Publication timeMon, 12 Oct 2026 10:46:45 +0000
Retrieval time2026-10-12T10:50:55.446Z
Last seen2026-10-12T10:50:55.446Z
Headline sourcePublisher (no WeSearch rewrite)
Excerpt sourcepublisher body
Excerpt methodFirst ~120 words (~800 chars) of extracted publisher body, fair-use limited.
SummaryWeSearch · cerebras-chat (WeSearch summarizer)
Summary source textcontentText
Citation coverageSummary is a WeSearch-generated derivative; primary citation is the original publisher URL.
ClusterPlD0pE7uagJt
Cluster logicGrouped by semantic title/content similarity across sources within a rolling window. Same-publisher template collisions are excluded from coverage comparison.
Ranking reasonStory pages are not engagement-ranked. Hub feeds use recency, with optional source-diversified chronological ordering (cap consecutive stories per source). No personalized ranking.
Publisher visitYes — open original
Substitutes article?No — link-out required for full text

Rights status (four layers)

Publisher-declared
No publisher-confirmed rights record for this source yet.
Machine-readable
No source-specific machine-readable restriction detected beyond the public feed.
WeSearch interpretation
WeSearch declared handling (basis: Derived from the published RSS/Atom feed). This is WeSearch policy, not a legal grant on the publisher's behalf.
Unknown
Retrieval and training permissions are not asserted unless the publisher confirms them.

WeSearch handling by dimension

Indexing May the item be indexed (stored, ranked, made findable)? Allowed
Snippet May a short excerpt of the publisher's text be shown? Allowed
AI summary May WeSearch generate its own short summary of the article? Limited
Retrieval / RAG May the content be exposed for third-party retrieval-augmented generation? Not asserted
Model training May the content be used to train AI models? Not asserted
Commercial reuse May the content be reused commercially? Not permitted

Basis: Derived from the published RSS/Atom feed. Contact: [email protected]. Reviewed: 2026-07-24.

Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand

AI-written review detection experiment This package contains the exact review files and scripts used for the experiment described in the accompanying article. It lets you rerun the detector comparison, the sentiment-classifier evaluation, and (if you download the source archive) the Mendeley collection audit on your own computer. Requirements Python 3.11 or newer The packages in requirements.txt About 2 GB of free disk space for the first run, when the pretrained models are downloaded The first run downloads GPT-2 and the all-MiniLM-L6-v2 sentence-embedding model from Hugging Face. The detector and classifier then run locally. The included review files preserve the exact generated examples used in the reported run, so they can be used directly in the analysis.

…

Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at GitHub.

Anonymous · no account needed
Share 𝕏 Facebook Reddit LinkedIn Threads WhatsApp Bluesky Mastodon Email

Discussion

0 comments

More from GitHub