Authorship verification (AV) aims to identify whether a pair of texts has the same author. We address the challenge of evaluating AV models' robustness against topic shifts. The conventional evaluation assumes minimal topic overlap between training and test data. However, we argue that there can still be topic leakage in test data, causing misleading model performance and unstable rankings. To address this, we propose an evaluation method called Heterogeneity-Informed Topic Sampling (HITS), which creates a smaller dataset with a heterogeneously distributed topic set. Our experimental results demonstrate that HITS-sampled datasets yield a more stable ranking of models across random seeds and evaluation splits. Our contributions include: 1. An analysis of causes and effects of topic leakage. 2. A demonstration of the HITS in reducing the effects of topic leakage, and 3. The Robust Authorship Verification bENchmark (RAVEN) that allows topic shortcut test to uncover AV models' reliance on topic-specific features.
Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable proficiency in a wide range of NLP tasks. However, when it comes to authorship verification (AV) tasks, which involve determining whether two given texts share the same authorship, even advanced models like ChatGPT exhibit notable limitations. This paper introduces a novel approach, termed InstructAV, for authorship verification. This approach utilizes LLMs in conjunction with a parameter-efficient fine-tuning (PEFT) method to simultaneously improve accuracy and explainability. The distinctiveness of InstructAV lies in its ability to align classification decisions with transparent and understandable explanations, representing a significant progression in the field of authorship verification. Through comprehensive experiments conducted across various datasets, InstructAV demonstrates its state-of-the-art performance on the AV task, offering high classification accuracy coupled with enhanced explanation reliability.
Authorship Verification (AV) (do two documents have the same author?) is essential in many sensitive real-life applications. AV is often used in proprietary domains that require a private, offline model, making SOTA online models like ChatGPT undesirable. Current offline models however have lower downstream utility due to low accuracy/scalability (eg: traditional stylometry AV systems) and lack of accessible post-hoc explanations. In this work, we take the first step to address the above challenges with our trained, offline Llama-3-8B model CAVE (Controllable Authorship Verification Explanations): CAVE generates free-text AV explanations that are controlled to be (1) structured (can be decomposed into sub-explanations in terms of relevant linguistic features), and (2) easily verified for explanation-label consistency (via intermediate labels in sub-explanations). We first engineer a prompt that can generate silver training data from a SOTA teacher model in the desired CAVE output format. We then filter and distill this data into a pretrained Llama-3-8B, our carefully selected student model. Results on three difficult AV datasets IMDb62, Blog-Auth, and Fanfiction show that CAVE generates high quality explanations (as measured by automatic and human evaluation) as well as competitive task accuracies.
Humans naturally attribute utterances of direct speech to their speaker in literary works. When attributing quotes, we process contextual information but also access mental representations of characters that we build and revise throughout the narrative. Recent methods to automatically attribute such utterances have explored simulating human logic with deterministic rules or learning new implicit rules with neural networks when processing contextual information. However, these systems inherently lack \textit{character} representations, which often leads to errors in more challenging examples of attribution: anaphoric and implicit quotes. In this work, we propose to augment a popular quotation attribution system, BookNLP, with character embeddings that encode global stylistic information of characters derived from an off-the-shelf stylometric model, Universal Authorship Representation (UAR). We create DramaCV (Code and data can be found at https://github.com/deezer/character_embeddings_qa ), a corpus of English drama plays from the 15th to 20th century that we automatically annotate for Authorship Verification of fictional characters utterances, and release two versions of UAR trained on DramaCV, that are tailored for literary characters analysis. Then, through an extensive evaluation on 28 novels, we show that combining BookNLP's contextual information with our proposed global character embeddings improves the identification of speakers for anaphoric and implicit quotes, reaching state-of-the-art performance.
The ability to accurately identify authorship is crucial for verifying content authenticity and mitigating misinformation. Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated an exceptional capacity for reasoning and problem-solving. However, their potential in authorship analysis remains under-explored. Traditional studies have depended on hand-crafted stylistic features, whereas state-of-the-art approaches leverage text embeddings from pre-trained language models. These methods, which typically require fine-tuning on labeled data, often suffer from performance degradation in cross-domain applications and provide limited explainability. This work seeks to address three research questions: (1) Can LLMs perform zero-shot, end-to-end authorship verification effectively? (2) Are LLMs capable of accurately attributing authorship among multiple candidates authors (e.g., 10 and 20)? (3) Can LLMs provide explainability in authorship analysis, particularly through the role of linguistic features? Moreover, we investigate the integration of explicit linguistic features to guide LLMs in their reasoning processes. Our assessment demonstrates LLMs' proficiency in both tasks without the need for domain-specific fine-tuning, providing explanations into their decision making via a detailed analysis of linguistic features. This establishes a new benchmark for future research on LLM-based authorship analysis.
Recent approaches to automatically detect the speaker of an utterance of direct speech often disregard general information about characters in favor of local information found in the context, such as surrounding mentions of entities. In this work, we explore stylistic representations of characters built by encoding their quotes with off-the-shelf pretrained Authorship Verification models in a large corpus of English novels (the Project Dialogism Novel Corpus). Results suggest that the combination of stylistic and topical information captured in some of these models accurately distinguish characters among each other, but does not necessarily improve over semantic-only models when attributing quotes. However, these results vary across novels and more investigation of stylometric models particularly tailored for literary texts and the study of characters should be conducted.
Authorship verification is the task of determining if two distinct writing samples share the same author and is typically concerned with the attribution of written text. In this paper, we explore the attribution of transcribed speech, which poses novel challenges. The main challenge is that many stylistic features, such as punctuation and capitalization, are not informative in this setting. On the other hand, transcribed speech exhibits other patterns, such as filler words and backchannels (e.g., 'um', 'uh-huh'), which may be characteristic of different speakers. We propose a new benchmark for speaker attribution focused on human-transcribed conversational speech transcripts. To limit spurious associations of speakers with topic, we employ both conversation prompts and speakers participating in the same conversation to construct verification trials of varying difficulties. We establish the state of the art on this new benchmark by comparing a suite of neural and non-neural baselines, finding that although written text attribution models achieve surprisingly good performance in certain settings, they perform markedly worse as conversational topic is increasingly controlled. We present analyses of the impact of transcription style on performance as well as the ability of fine-tuning on speech transcripts to improve performance.
While a substantial amount of work has recently been devoted to enhance the performance of computational Authorship Identification (AId) systems, little to no attention has been paid to endowing AId systems with the ability to explain the reasons behind their predictions. This lacking substantially hinders the practical employment of AId methodologies, since the predictions returned by such systems are hardly useful unless they are supported with suitable explanations. In this paper, we explore the applicability of existing general-purpose eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) techniques to AId, with a special focus on explanations addressed to scholars working in cultural heritage. In particular, we assess the relative merits of three different types of XAI techniques (feature ranking, probing, factuals and counterfactual selection) on three different AId tasks (authorship attribution, authorship verification, same-authorship verification) by running experiments on real AId data. Our analysis shows that, while these techniques make important first steps towards explainable Authorship Identification, more work remains to be done in order to provide tools that can be profitably integrated in the workflows of scholars.
While state-of-the-art large language models (LLMs) can excel at adapting text from one style to another, current work does not address the explainability of style transfer models. Recent work has explored generating textual explanations from larger teacher models and distilling them into smaller student models. One challenge with such approach is that LLM outputs may contain errors that require expertise to correct, but gathering and incorporating expert feedback is difficult due to cost and availability. To address this challenge, we propose ICLEF, a novel human-AI collaboration approach to model distillation that incorporates scarce expert human feedback by combining in-context learning and model self-critique. We show that our method leads to generation of high-quality synthetic explainable style transfer datasets for formality (e-GYAFC) and subjective bias (e-WNC). Via automatic and human evaluation, we show that specialized student models fine-tuned on our datasets outperform generalist teacher models on the explainable style transfer task in one-shot settings, and perform competitively compared to few-shot teacher models, highlighting the quality of the data and the role of expert feedback. In an extrinsic task of authorship attribution, we show that explanations generated by smaller models fine-tuned on e-GYAFC are more predictive of authorship than explanations generated by few-shot teacher models.
We investigate the effects on authorship identification tasks of a fundamental shift in how to conceive the vectorial representations of documents that are given as input to a supervised learner. In ``classic'' authorship analysis a feature vector represents a document, the value of a feature represents (an increasing function of) the relative frequency of the feature in the document, and the class label represents the author of the document. We instead investigate the situation in which a feature vector represents an unordered pair of documents, the value of a feature represents the absolute difference in the relative frequencies (or increasing functions thereof) of the feature in the two documents, and the class label indicates whether the two documents are from the same author or not. This latter (learner-independent) type of representation has been occasionally used before, but has never been studied systematically. We argue that it is advantageous, and that in some cases (e.g., authorship verification) it provides a much larger quantity of information to the training process than the standard representation. The experiments that we carry out on several publicly available datasets (among which one that we here make available for the first time) show that feature vectors representing pairs of documents (that we here call Diff-Vectors) bring about systematic improvements in the effectiveness of authorship identification tasks, and especially so when training data are scarce (as it is often the case in real-life authorship identification scenarios). Our experiments tackle same-author verification, authorship verification, and closed-set authorship attribution; while DVs are naturally geared for solving the 1st, we also provide two novel methods for solving the 2nd and 3rd that use a solver for the 1st as a building block.
Despite decades of research on authorship attribution (AA) and authorship verification (AV), inconsistent dataset splits/filtering and mismatched evaluation methods make it difficult to assess the state of the art. In this paper, we present a survey of the fields, resolve points of confusion, introduce Valla that standardizes and benchmarks AA/AV datasets and metrics, provide a large-scale empirical evaluation, and provide apples-to-apples comparisons between existing methods. We evaluate eight promising methods on fifteen datasets (including distribution-shifted challenge sets) and introduce a new large-scale dataset based on texts archived by Project Gutenberg. Surprisingly, we find that a traditional Ngram-based model performs best on 5 (of 7) AA tasks, achieving an average macro-accuracy of $76.50\%$ (compared to $66.71\%$ for a BERT-based model). However, on the two AA datasets with the greatest number of words per author, as well as on the AV datasets, BERT-based models perform best. While AV methods are easily applied to AA, they are seldom included as baselines in AA papers. We show that through the application of hard-negative mining, AV methods are competitive alternatives to AA methods. Valla and all experiment code can be found here: https://github.com/JacobTyo/Valla
Linguistic style is an integral component of language. Recent advances in the development of style representations have increasingly used training objectives from authorship verification (AV): Do two texts have the same author? The assumption underlying the AV training task (same author approximates same writing style) enables self-supervised and, thus, extensive training. However, a good performance on the AV task does not ensure good "general-purpose" style representations. For example, as the same author might typically write about certain topics, representations trained on AV might also encode content information instead of style alone. We introduce a variation of the AV training task that controls for content using conversation or domain labels. We evaluate whether known style dimensions are represented and preferred over content information through an original variation to the recently proposed STEL framework. We find that representations trained by controlling for conversation are better than representations trained with domain or no content control at representing style independent from content.
Learning from fully-unlabeled data is challenging in Multimedia Forensics problems, such as Person Re-Identification and Text Authorship Attribution. Recent self-supervised learning methods have shown to be effective when dealing with fully-unlabeled data in cases where the underlying classes have significant semantic differences, as intra-class distances are substantially lower than inter-class distances. However, this is not the case for forensic applications in which classes have similar semantics and the training and test sets have disjoint identities. General self-supervised learning methods might fail to learn discriminative features in this scenario, thus requiring more robust strategies. We propose a strategy to tackle Person Re-Identification and Text Authorship Attribution by enabling learning from unlabeled data even when samples from different classes are not prominently diverse. We propose a novel ensemble-based clustering strategy whereby clusters derived from different configurations are combined to generate a better grouping for the data samples in a fully-unsupervised way. This strategy allows clusters with different densities and higher variability to emerge, reducing intra-class discrepancies without requiring the burden of finding an optimal configuration per dataset. We also consider different Convolutional Neural Networks for feature extraction and subsequent distance computations between samples. We refine these distances by incorporating context and grouping them to capture complementary information. Our method is robust across both tasks, with different data modalities, and outperforms state-of-the-art methods with a fully-unsupervised solution without any labeling or human intervention.
One of the main drivers of the recent advances in authorship verification is the PAN large-scale authorship dataset. Despite generating significant progress in the field, inconsistent performance differences between the closed and open test sets have been reported. To this end, we improve the experimental setup by proposing five new public splits over the PAN dataset, specifically designed to isolate and identify biases related to the text topic and to the author's writing style. We evaluate several BERT-like baselines on these splits, showing that such models are competitive with authorship verification state-of-the-art methods. Furthermore, using explainable AI, we find that these baselines are biased towards named entities. We show that models trained without the named entities obtain better results and generalize better when tested on DarkReddit, our new dataset for authorship verification.
The automatic verification of document authorships is important in various settings. Researchers are for example judged and compared by the amount and impact of their publications and public figures are confronted by their posts on social media platforms. Therefore, it is important that authorship information in frequently used web services and platforms is correct. The question whether a given document is written by a given author is commonly referred to as authorship verification (AV). While AV is a widely investigated problem in general, only few works consider settings where the documents are short and written in a rather uniform style. This makes most approaches unpractical for online databases and knowledge graphs in the scholarly domain. Here, authorships of scientific publications have to be verified, often with just abstracts and titles available. To this point, we present our novel approach LG4AV which combines language models and graph neural networks for authorship verification. By directly feeding the available texts in a pre-trained transformer architecture, our model does not need any hand-crafted stylometric features that are not meaningful in scenarios where the writing style is, at least to some extent, standardized. By the incorporation of a graph neural network structure, our model can benefit from relations between authors that are meaningful with respect to the verification process. For example, scientific authors are more likely to write about topics that are addressed by their co-authors and twitter users tend to post about the same subjects as people they follow. We experimentally evaluate our model and study to which extent the inclusion of co-authorships enhances verification decisions in bibliometric environments.
The PAN 2021 authorship verification (AV) challenge is part of a three-year strategy, moving from a cross-topic/closed-set AV task to a cross-topic/open-set AV task over a collection of fanfiction texts. In this work, we present a novel hybrid neural-probabilistic framework that is designed to tackle the challenges of the 2021 task. Our system is based on our 2020 winning submission, with updates to significantly reduce sensitivities to topical variations and to further improve the system's calibration by means of an uncertainty-adaptation layer. Our framework additionally includes an out-of-distribution detector (O2D2) for defining non-responses. Our proposed system outperformed all other systems that participated in the PAN 2021 AV task.
We are addressing two fundamental problems in authorship verification (AV): Topic variability and miscalibration. Variations in the topic of two disputed texts are a major cause of error for most AV systems. In addition, it is observed that the underlying probability estimates produced by deep learning AV mechanisms oftentimes do not match the actual case counts in the respective training data. As such, probability estimates are poorly calibrated. We are expanding our framework from PAN 2020 to include Bayes factor scoring (BFS) and an uncertainty adaptation layer (UAL) to address both problems. Experiments with the 2020/21 PAN AV shared task data show that the proposed method significantly reduces sensitivities to topical variations and significantly improves the system's calibration.
Existing research on Authorship Attribution (AA) focuses on texts for which a lot of data is available (e.g novels), mainly in English. We approach AA via Authorship Verification on short Italian texts in two novel datasets, and analyze the interaction between genre, topic, gender and length. Results show that AV is feasible even with little data, but more evidence helps. Gender and topic can be indicative clues, and if not controlled for, they might overtake more specific aspects of personal style.
Authorship verification is the task of analyzing the linguistic patterns of two or more texts to determine whether they were written by the same author or not. The analysis is traditionally performed by experts who consider linguistic features, which include spelling mistakes, grammatical inconsistencies, and stylistics for example. Machine learning algorithms, on the other hand, can be trained to accomplish the same, but have traditionally relied on so-called stylometric features. The disadvantage of such features is that their reliability is greatly diminished for short and topically varied social media texts. In this interdisciplinary work, we propose a substantial extension of a recently published hierarchical Siamese neural network approach, with which it is feasible to learn neural features and to visualize the decision-making process. For this purpose, a new large-scale corpus of short Amazon reviews for text comparison research is compiled and we show that the Siamese network topologies outperform state-of-the-art approaches that were built up on stylometric features. Our linguistic analysis of the internal attention weights of the network shows that the proposed method is indeed able to latch on to some traditional linguistic categories.
This paper reports on a writing style analysis of hyperpartisan (i.e., extremely one-sided) news in connection to fake news. It presents a large corpus of 1,627 articles that were manually fact-checked by professional journalists from BuzzFeed. The articles originated from 9 well-known political publishers, 3 each from the mainstream, the hyperpartisan left-wing, and the hyperpartisan right-wing. In sum, the corpus contains 299 fake news, 97% of which originated from hyperpartisan publishers. We propose and demonstrate a new way of assessing style similarity between text categories via Unmasking---a meta-learning approach originally devised for authorship verification---, revealing that the style of left-wing and right-wing news have a lot more in common than any of the two have with the mainstream. Furthermore, we show that hyperpartisan news can be discriminated well by its style from the mainstream (F1=0.78), as can be satire from both (F1=0.81). Unsurprisingly, style-based fake news detection does not live up to scratch (F1=0.46). Nevertheless, the former results are important to implement pre-screening for fake news detectors.