IC-560Llama3-8B-Instruct reliably distinguishes its own outputs from human outputs in self-recognition tasks, while Llama3-8B base performs at chance, indicating the ability is acquired during post-training.

Christopher Ackerman, Nina Panickssery

SourceInspection and Control of Self-Generated-Text Recognition Ability in Llama3-8b-Instruct

The paper tests both the instruct and base variants of Llama3-8B on paired and individual presentation self-recognition paradigms across four datasets (CNN, XSum, Dolly, SAD). In the individual paradigm, the chat model achieves 57.2% (CNN), 61.0% (XSum), 52.3% (Dolly), and 65.8% (SAD) accuracy, while the base model is at or below chance on all four. In the paired paradigm, the chat model distinguishes its own text from human text in all datasets, but after length normalization it can no longer distinguish its own text from other AI model outputs. The base model fails in both paradigms. Perplexity correlations are negligible (<=0.16), ruling out a simple familiarity-based mechanism.

Evidence
correlational
Key metric
Individual presentation: chat model CNN 57.2% (p=0.004), XSum 61.0% (p=0.0001), Dolly 52.3% (p=0.3576), SAD 65.8% (p=0.0001); base model CNN 50.0% (p=1.000), XSum 50.3% (p=0.9045), Dolly 49.5% (p=0.8415), SAD 48.5% (p=0.5485). Perplexity correlations <=0.16.
Caveat
The authors note that in unnormalized texts the model exploits length as a cue (its outputs are longer than human outputs), and that after length normalization it can no longer distinguish its own text from other AI model outputs. They acknowledge that undetected surface-level tells may remain.
Model
Llama 3 8B Instruct, 8B
Datasets
CNN/DailyMail [eval], XSum [eval], Databricks Dolly [eval], SAD [eval]
Related work
Panickssery et al. 2024 [builds-on], Laine et al. 2024 [builds-on]
Related findings
IC-561, IC-562, IC-563
Extraction
automatic-extraction