←back to thread

Do AI detectors work? Students face false cheating accusations

(www.bloomberg.com)
427 points JumpCrisscross | 1 comments | 20 Oct 24 17:26 UTC | HN request time: 0.197s | source
Show context
mrweasel ◴[21 Oct 24 08:22 UTC] No.41901883[source]▶
The part that annoys me is that students apparently have no right to be told why the AI flagged their work. For any process where an computer is allowed to judge people, where should be a rule in place that demands that the algorithm be able explains EXACTLY why it flagged this person.

Now this would effectively kill off the current AI powered solution, because they have no way of explaining, or even understanding, why a paper may be plagiarized or not, but I'm okay with that.

replies(8): >>41902108 #>>41902131 #>>41902463 #>>41902522 #>>41902919 #>>41905044 #>>41905842 #>>41907688 #
ben_w ◴[21 Oct 24 09:08 UTC] No.41902108[source]▶
> For any process where an computer is allowed to judge people, where should be a rule in place that demands that the algorithm be able explains EXACTLY why it flagged this person.

This is a big part of GDPR.

replies(3): >>41902128 #>>41902309 #>>41903067 #
1. mrweasel ◴[21 Oct 24 09:38 UTC] No.41902309[source]▶
I did not know that. Thank you.

Reading the rules quickly, it does seem like you're not entitled to know why the computer flagged you, only that you have the right to "obtain human intervention". That seems a little to soft, I'd like to know under which rules exactly I'm being judged.