Can we use the detection idiom to check if a class has a member function with a specific signature?

Given a (reduced) implementation of the detection idiom

namespace type_traits
{
    template<typename... Ts>
    using void_t = void;

    namespace detail
    {
        template<typename, template<typename...> class, typename...>
        struct is_detected : std::false_type {};

        template<template<class...> class Operation, typename... Arguments>
        struct is_detected<void_t<Operation<Arguments...>>, Operation, Arguments...> : std::true_type {};
    }

    template<template<class...> class Operation, typename... Arguments>
    using is_detected = detail::is_detected<void_t<>, Operation, Arguments...>;

    template<template<class...> class Operation, typename... Arguments>
    constexpr bool is_detected_v = detail::is_detected<void_t<>, Operation, Arguments...>::value;
}

we can easily check if a class foo contains a member function bar

struct  foo {
    int const& bar(int&&) { return 0; }
};

template<class T>
using bar_t = decltype(std::declval<T>().bar(0));

int main()
{
    static_assert(type_traits::is_detected_v<bar_t, foo>, "not detected");
    return 0;
}

However, as you can see, we cannot detect that foo::bar's argument type is int&&. The detection succeeds, cause 0 can be passed to foo::bar. I know that there are plenty of options to check for the exact signature of a (member) function. But I would like to know, if it's possible to modify this detection toolkit in order to detect that foo::bar's argument type is exactly int&&.

[I've created a live demo of this example.]