Evaluating the Performance of AI Text Detectors, Few-Shot and Chain-of-Thought Prompting Using DeepSeek Generated Text

Abstract

Large language models (LLMs) have rapidly transformed the creation of written materials. LLMs have led to questions about writing integrity, thereby driving the creation of artificial intelligence (AI) detection technologies. Adversarial attacks, such as standard and humanized paraphrasing, inhibit detectors' ability to detect machine-generated text. Previous studies have mainly focused on ChatGPT and other well-known LLMs and have shown varying accuracy across detectors. However, there is a clear gap in the literature about DeepSeek, a recently published LLM. Therefore, in this work, we investigate whether six generally accessible AI detection tools -- AI Text Classifier, Content Detector AI, Copyleaks, QuillBot, GPT-2, and GPTZero -- can consistently recognize text generated by DeepSeek. The detectors were exposed to the aforementioned adversarial attacks. We also considered DeepSeek as a detector by performing few-shot prompting and chain-of-thought reasoning (CoT) for classifying AI and human-written text. We collected 49 human-authored question-answer pairs from before the LLM era and generated matching responses using DeepSeek-v3, producing 49 AI-generated samples. Then, we applied adversarial techniques such as paraphrasing and humanizing to add 196 more samples. These were used to challenge detector robustness and assess accuracy impact. While QuillBot and Copyleaks showed near-perfect performance on original and paraphrased DeepSeek text, others -- particularly AI Text Classifier and GPT-2 -- showed inconsistent results. The most effective attack was humanization, reducing accuracy to 71% for Copyleaks, 58% for QuillBot, and 52% for GPTZero. Few-shot and CoT prompting showed high accuracy, with the best five-shot result misclassifying only one of 49 samples (AI recall 96%, human recall 100%).