Do AI detectors work? Students face false cheating accusations

FWIW, I'm a consultant for a large University hospital, and Dutch. My PhD thesis, years ago, got the remark: "Should have checked with a native speaker."

So, now I use ChatGPT to check my English. I just write what I want to write than ask it to make my text more "More concise, business-like and not so American" (yeah the thing is by default as ultra enthusiastic as an American waiter). And 9 out of 10 times it says what I want to say but better than I wrote myself, and in much less words and better English.

I don't think it took less time to write my report, but it is much much better than I could have made alone.

AI detector may go off (or it goes on? of is it of? Idk, perhaps I should ask Chat ;)), but it is about as useful as a spell-check detector.

It's a Large Language Model, you should just is like that, it is not a Large Fact Model. But if you're a teacher you should be a good bullshit detector, right?

If I'm every checking some student's report, you may get this feedback: For god's sake, check the language with ChatGPT, but for God's sake check the fact in some other way.

>It's a Large Language Model, you should just is like that, it is not a Large Fact Model.

Not by design, but the training corpus necessarily includes a lot of "facts" (claims made by whoever wrote the original text). A model that is trying to output nonfiction on a specific topic, is likely to encounter relatively more models of claims that either actually were incidentally true, or at least have the same general form as true claims without an obvious "tell".

Of course, every now and then it goes off the rails and "hallucinates". Bad luck for the student who doesn't verify the output when this happens (which is probably a lot of students, since part of the motivation to cheat is not knowing the material well enough to do such verification properly).