Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41372163›Full record

ArticleNature communications2025

Linguistic features of AI mis/disinformation and the detection limits of LLMs.

Yulong Ma, Xinsheng Zhang, Jinge Ren, Runzhou Wang, Minghu Wang, Yang Chen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Yulong MaSchool of Management, Xi'an University of Architecture and Technology, Xi'an, Shaanxi, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8989-5821
Xinsheng ZhangSchool of Management, Xi'an University of Architecture and Technology, Xi'an, Shaanxi, China. zhangxs@xauat.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4065-6819
Jinge RenSchool of Management, Xi'an University of Architecture and Technology, Xi'an, Shaanxi, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0009-7888-2342
Runzhou WangSchool of Economics and Management, Xi'an University of Posts and Telecommunications, Xi'an, Shaanxi, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7607-4047
Minghu WangSchool of Management, Xi'an University of Architecture and Technology, Xi'an, Shaanxi, China.
Yang ChenCollege of Humanities, Zhejiang Normal University, Jinhua, Zhejiang, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0000-4163-9490

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The persuasive capability of large language models (LLMs) in generating mis/disinformation is widely recognized, but the linguistic ambiguity of such content and inconsistent findings on LLM-based detection reveal unresolved risks in information governance. To address the lack of Chinese datasets, this study compiles two datasets of Chinese AI mis/disinformation generated by multi-lingual models involving deepfakes and cheapfakes. Through psycholinguistic and computational linguistic analyses, the quality modulation effects of eight language features (including sentiment, cognition, and personal concerns), along with toxicity scores and syntactic dependency distance differences, were discovered. Furthermore, key factors influencing zero-shot LLMs in comprehending and detecting AI mis/disinformation are examined. The results show that although implicit linguistic distinctions exist, the intrinsic detection capability of LLMs remains limited. Meanwhile, the quality modulation effects of AI mis/disinformation linguistic features may lead to the failure of AI mis/disinformation detectors. These findings highlight the major challenges of applying LLMs in information governance.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceLanguageLinguisticsChinaHumansPsycholinguistics

Identifiers

PMID41372163
PMCPMC12800167

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.