Do AI detectors work? Students face false cheating accusations

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.

> 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.

Indeed. Quoting article 22 [1]:

> The data subject shall have the right not to be subject to a decision based solely on automated processing [...]

[1]: https://gdpr.eu/article-22-automated-individual-decision-mak...

So if an automated decision happens, and the reviewer looks for a second at it, and says, good enough, that will be OK according to GDPR. Don't see what GDPR solves here.

Well I guess the theory is that you could go to court, and the court would be reasonable and say "this 1 second look does not fulfill the requirement, you need to actually use human judgement and see what was going on there". Lots of discussions regarding FAANG malicious compliance have shown this is how high courts work in EU. When there is political will.

But if you're a nobody, and can't afford to go to court against Deutsche Bank for example, of course you're SOL. EU has some good parts, but it's still a human government.

It's especially problematic since a good chunk of those "flagged" are actually doing something nefarious, and both courts and government will consider that "mostly works" is a good outcome. One or ten unlucky citizens are just the way the world works, as long as it's not someone with money or power or fame.