←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: 0s | 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 #
iLoveOncall ◴[21 Oct 24 11:17 UTC] No.41902919[source]▶
Surely you understand how any algorithm (regardless of its nature) that gives the cheater the list of reasons why it spotted cheating will only work for a single iteration before the cheaters adapt, right?
replies(2): >>41904104 #>>41904191 #
1. baby_souffle ◴[21 Oct 24 13:55 UTC] No.41904191[source]▶
> Surely you understand how any algorithm (regardless of its nature) that gives the cheater the list of reasons why it spotted cheating will only work for a single iteration before the cheaters adapt, right?

This happens anyways, though? Any service that's useful for alternative / shady / illicit purposes is part of a cat/mouse game. Even if you don't tell the $badActors what you're looking for, they'll learn soon enough what you're not looking for just by virtue of their exploitative behavior still working.

I'm a little skeptical of any "we fight bad guys!" effort that can be completely tanked by telling the bad guys how they got caught.