SlopShape identifies AI-written company blog posts from structure alone, and rewording by the same model does not help

Word-level detectors already spot unedited AI text almost perfectly, then break the moment the same model is asked to reword its output. A new preprint asks whether the signature moves down one level, into how a post is structured, and reports that it does.

The paper, titled "SlopShape: Identifying AI-Generated Commercial Web Content", was posted to arXiv on 14 September 2026 by Jochen Madler and appeared on Hacker News as a Show HN with 51 points. It replicates a 2026 study called StoryScope, which found structural fingerprints in AI-generated fiction, and applies the same instrument to company blog posts.

What the study measured

Madler collected 2,250 human blog posts from 268 company domains, all published before ChatGPT, and paired them with 11,250 AI-written mirrors from five frontier models. A 214-feature scoring instrument, applied by a language model, was validated in a human gold-annotation session where two human annotators agreed with each other at Cohen's kappa 0.928 and with the model at 0.946.

Trained on 187 of those features that describe structure, so how information is presented, in what order, with what evidence and in what voice, the classifier reaches 98.0 macro-F1 on held-out companies. When every AI post is reworded by the same model that wrote it, the score is 98.1. That is the interesting number, because rewording is the standard workaround against word-level detectors. It has no effect here.

Attribution, not only detection

The same features also identify which model wrote a post. Attribution to the correct model runs at 79.3 percent against a chance rate of 16.7 percent. Human posts sit in structural configurations that AI models rarely produce, so the human class is easier to recognise than any specific model.

The paper says AI posts share a "tidy, self-announcing shape". Reading it against what a marketing team publishes, this means AI copy tends to open on a topic sentence, march through parallel sections, resolve neatly, and cite evidence in ways that mirror the prompt back. Human writing wanders more, and the wandering is what the classifier picks up on.

A test that survives model rewrites

Every claim on the site about a live Google system is Google's own, and every claim about how answer engines pick citations is a vendor's, so a paper that measures the shape of the output rather than the shape of the ranking function is a rare fixed point. If a structural detector is this good on held-out companies, a review pipeline can bring the same test to a page before it publishes. A page that scores as AI-written, and cannot be changed to score as human-written by asking the model to rewrite it, is a page whose value has to come from something the shape check cannot see: original data, a first-hand account, a specific expert judgment. The code, the prompts and the instrument are in the paper's companion repository at github.com/pulse-energy-eu/slopshape.

Source

arXiv 2609.15369: SlopShape: Identifying AI-Generated Commercial Web Content by Jochen Madler, posted 14 September 2026 (v2). Code and prompts at github.com/pulse-energy-eu/slopshape. Show HN discussion at Hacker News item 49800566.