Fiction written by artificial intelligence is easy to detect because it struggles with complex story structure and tends to moralize in clunky ways, according to a preprint study from researchers at University of Maryland, College Park and Google DeepMind. They found that AI fiction has tells that go beyond stereotypical overuse of em-dashes and other obvious AI tropes and have more to do with the formulaic nature of the text itself.
“AI stories over-explain themes and favor tidy, single-track plots while human stories frame protagonists’ choices as more morally ambiguous and have increased temporal complexity,” the study, which looked at more than 50,000 AI-generated short stories, found. “Claude produces notably flat event escalation, GPT over-indexes on dream sequences, and Gemini defaults to external character description. We find that AI-generated stories cluster in a shared region of narrative space, while human-authored stories exhibit greater diversity. More broadly, these results suggest that differences in underlying narrative construction, not just writing style, can be used to separate human-written original works from AI-generated fiction.”
Basically, AI-generated fiction sucks and at the moment is easy to detect. The typical method of detection involves looking for stylistic markers such as an abundance of em-dashes, the overuse of the word “delve,” or an obsession with goblins, but this project tried something different. “The idea for this project came because we are hoping to eventually move past plain text detection, into some sort of space where we can separate human ideas from AI-generated ideas,” Jenna Russell, a University of Maryland researcher and one of the study’s authors, told 404 Media. Russell is also an intern at the AI-detection company Pangram.
Which are all ways of creating more text without saying anything. Repetition is another classic.
I feel like that's a problem with all low-effort, AI-generated texts (which is the vast majority of them): You give it a prompt with maybe ten pieces of information and expect it to generate a text that's a hundred times as long, while also not straying too far from the prompt.
Of course, it's going to take every opportunity to not say anything that would advance the plot. Because advancing the plot means either using up the little input you gave it, or to invent new information which might contradict the prompt...
Yeah, AI sucks for writing, but I had a back and forth going where ChatGPT wpukd produce like, 3-4 paragraphs and dialog and I would tell it where to go next and it was producing some pretty good stuff. This was back on like, 2 or 3 model versions ago too. I had to stop because it updated the model and suddenly it was all "Wait, you had me writing a sexy story!!!! I can't do that, I am programmed to be a puritan!!!!"
You are not going to get a whole book ornshort stoty with one prompt.