These are just some of the good examples I found.

My hunch that this is substantially LLM-generated is based on more than that.

In my head it's like a Bayesian classifier, you look at all the sentences and judge whether each is more or less likely to be LLM vs human generated. Then you add prior information like that the author did the research using Claude - which increases the likelihood that they also use Claude for writing.

Maybe your detector just isn't so sensitive (yet) or maybe I'm wrong but I have pretty high confidence at least 10% of sentences were LLM-generated.

Yes, the stylistic patterns exist in human speech but RLHF has increased their frequency. Also, LLM writing has a certain monotonicity that human writing often lacks. Which is not surprising: the machine generates more or less the most likely text in an algorithmic manner. Humans don't. They wrote a few sentences, then get a coffee, sleep, write a few more. That creates more variety than an LLM can.

Fun exercise: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:AI_or_not_quiz

▲

monooso 10 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Here's an alternative way of thinking about this...

Someone probably expended a lot of time and effort planning, thinking about, and writing an interesting article, and then you stroll by and casually accuse them of being a bone idle cheat, with no supporting evidence other than your "sensitive detector" and a bunch of hand-wavy nonsense that adds up to naught.

▲

xmcqdpt2 8 hours ago | parent | next [-]

To start, this is more or less an advertising piece for their product. It's pretty clear that they want to sell you Allium. And that's fine! They are allowed! But even if that was written by a human, they were compensated for it. They didn't expend lots of effort and thinking, it's their job.

More importantly, it's an article about using Claude from a company about using Claude. I think on the balance it's very likely that they would use Claude to write their technical blog posts.

	▲	monooso 8 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> They didn't expend lots of effort and thinking, it's their job. Your job doesn't require you to think or expend effort?

▲

kenjackson 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

While I agree with the sentiment, using AI to write the final draft of the article isn’t cheating. People may not like it, but it’s more a stylistic preference.

	▲	TylerE 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Using AI and a human byline is 100% cheating.

▲

bookofjoe 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Yet another way the mere possibility of AI/LLM being involved diminishes the value of ALL text.

If there is constant vigilance on the part of the reader as to how it was created, meaning and value become secondary, a sure path to the death of reading as a joy.

▲

NetMageSCW 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Those aren’t good examples - that’s just LLMs living for free in your head.