AI-generated poetry is indistinguishable from human-written poetry and is rated more favorably - Scientific Reports
www.nature.com
As AI-generated text continues to evolve, distinguishing it from human-authored content has become increasingly difficult. This study examined whether non-expert readers could reliably differentiate between AI-generated poems and those written by well-known human poets. We conducted two experiments with non-expert poetry readers and found that participants performed below chance levels in identifying AI-generated poems (46.6% accuracy, χ2(1, N = 16,340) = 75.13, p < 0.0001). Notably, participants were more likely to judge AI-generated poems as human-authored than actual human-authored poems (χ2(2, N = 16,340) = 247.04, p < 0.0001). We found that AI-generated poems were rated more favorably in qualities such as rhythm and beauty, and that this contributed to their mistaken identification as human-authored. Our findings suggest that participants employed shared yet flawed heuristics to differentiate AI from human poetry: the simplicity of AI-generated poems may be easier for non-experts to understand, leading them to prefer AI-generated poetry and misinterpret the complexity of human poems as incoherence generated by AI.

As AI-generated text continues to evolve, distinguishing it from human-authored content has become increasingly difficult. This study examined whether non-expert readers could reliably differentiate between AI-generated poems and those written by well-known human poets. We conducted two experiments with non-expert poetry readers and found that participants performed below chance levels in identifying AI-generated poems (46.6% accuracy, χ2(1, N = 16,340) = 75.13, p < 0.0001). Notably, participants were more likely to judge AI-generated poems as human-authored than actual human-authored poems (χ2(2, N = 16,340) = 247.04, p < 0.0001). We found that AI-generated poems were rated more favorably in qualities such as rhythm and beauty, and that this contributed to their mistaken identification as human-authored. Our findings suggest that participants employed shared yet flawed heuristics to differentiate AI from human poetry: the simplicity of AI-generated poems may be easier for non-experts to understand, leading them to prefer AI-generated poetry and misinterpret the complexity of human poems as incoherence generated by AI.

  • Didros@beehaw.org
    3·
    3 hours ago

    Have always really enjoyed writing poetry and playing with rhyme and meter. I’ve never enjoyed reading poetry from famous poets. The first time I became interested in “high status” poetry, just for its status, I heard about the newest Poet Loriet. I looked up their poems, all excited to read clear, interesting takes on the human condition.

    I think it was probably Kay Ryan at that time. Here is a poem by Kay that I found online:

    The Elephant in the Room
    Kay Ryan

    The room is
    almost all
    elephant.
    Almost none
    of it isn’t.
    Pretty much
    solid elephant.
    So there’s no
    room to talk
    about it.

    It wasn’t the typical art critique that a layman would typically jump to that filled me, “I could do that” it was tge far worse feeling of, “If I had written this, I wouldn’t have thought to show anyone”

    I pretty much decided then and there that poetry, like most art, it seems, has little to do with content or quality. More so with means and notoriety.

    How is it people are at all surprised out society created a new generation more obsessed with being popular online than anything else?