As large language models are becoming more embedded in different user-facing services, it is important to be able to distinguish between human-written and machine-generated text to verify the authenticity of news articles, product reviews, etc. Thus, in this paper we set out to explore whether it is possible to use one language model to identify machine-generated text produced by another language model, in a zero-shot way, even if the two have different architectures and are trained on different data. We find that overall, smaller models are better universal machine-generated text detectors: they can more precisely detect text generated from both small and larger models, without the need for any additional training/data. Interestingly, we find that whether or not the detector and generator models were trained on the same data is not critically important to the detection success. For instance the OPT-125M model has an AUC of 0.90 in detecting GPT4 generations, whereas a larger model from the GPT family, GPTJ-6B, has AUC of 0.65.

The wide adoption and application of Masked language models (MLMs) on sensitive data (from legal to medical) necessitates a thorough quantitative investigation into their privacy vulnerabilities. Prior attempts at measuring leakage of MLMs via membership inference attacks have been inconclusive, implying potential robustness of MLMs to privacy attacks.In this work, we posit that prior attempts were inconclusive because they based their attack solely on the MLM’s model score. We devise a stronger membership inference attack based on likelihood ratio hypothesis testing that involves an additional reference MLM to more accurately quantify the privacy risks of memorization in MLMs. We show that masked language models are indeed susceptible to likelihood ratio membership inference attacks: Our empirical results, on models trained on medical notes, show that our attack improves the AUC of prior membership inference attacks from 0.66 to an alarmingly high 0.90 level.