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.
Anyone interested to learn more about it, I recommend the recent book "AI Snake Oil" from Arvind Narayanan and Sayash Kapoor [1]. It is a critical but nuanced book and helps to see the whole AI hype a little more clearly.
[1] https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691249131/ai....
Examples: Spam detection, copyrighted material detection, etc.
Really? A spammer is trying to ace a test where my attention is the prize. I don't really see a huge difference between a student/diploma and a spammer/my attention.
Education tech companies have been playing with ML and similar tech that is "AI adjacent" for decades. If you went to school in the US any time after computers entered the class room, you probably had some exposure to a machine generated/scored test. That data was used to tailor lessons to pupil interest/goals/state curricula. Good software also gave instructor feedback about where each student/cohort is struggling or not.
LLMs are just an evolution of tech that's been pretty well integrated into academic life for a while now. Was anything in academia prepared for this evolution? No. But banning it outright isn't going to work