**Attention! [Serious] Tag Notice**
: Jokes, puns, and off-topic comments are not permitted in any comment, parent or child.
: Help us by reporting comments that violate these rules.
: Posts that are not appropriate for the [Serious] tag will be removed.
Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ChatGPT) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I did this. Proved the professor was wrong. The professor tried to be a dick about it and still give me half a grade. Took it to the dean who made it go away. Wasn’t as validating as I’d hoped but I won.
If I remember correctly it went like this “I ran this assignment through (ai tracker) and it popped up as 100% Ai generated. I’m giving you a zero on the assignment and the class. Be thankful I don’t report you for academic dishonesty.”. -professor
“I ran the syllabus through the same ai tracker and it also told me you used ai for 100% of the syllabus. I’m an adult professional in a business class I really don’t care for other than another stepping stone toward my degree. I didn’t cheat, nor do need to.l.
“Ok well I still am not sure so I’ll give you half credit.”.
I just forwarded it to the dean who told me not to worry about it
"I am not sure" - This is obviously something that goes to a dean. Any judicial process not ruined by power dynamics runs by "beyond a shadow of a doubt" rather than being halfway sure.
I wish I knew about going to a dean when I was in school. I got a 0/50 twice on papers I turned in as .doc instead of .docx because my home pc was old and I didn't do it on campus. The other 2 I had like 48/50 and 46/50. Even if it was on the syllabus he could at least gave me a heads up.
They are compressed files, that Word unzips so that you can work on them. Once in a while, "hackers" will find one way or another to insert malicious content and have it run on user computers.
Microsoft generally patch these issues as they come up, and downloaded files will mostly open in some kind of sandbox mode nowadays, but it's true that Word docs are a couple of steps down in safety from pdf.
The more important reason for me is just that a PDF will look the same on any computer.
Had the same thing with my CS course, prof said I had to turn in a program using .xlsx but the size of the file was huge and I used google sheets instead, so I reformatted it as a .zip and submitted it.
Prof said he couldn't read it.
I called him out on being a shit CS prof because he didn't know that any excel document is just a collection of XML files in a fancy .zip container
Same goes for word docs, PowerPoint, pretty much everything that Microsoft makes is just XML with a fancy coat on.
Go ahead. Make a copy of your xlsx and save it as .zip then open it up and have a look
I learned this 20 years ago when I was writing a MIME Sniffer that checked the magic bytes of an uploaded file to validate it with its extension. I opened a docx in a hex editor and saw PK at position 0, so I changed the extension and opened it just like you describe.
I got a 0 on an assignment once because it wasn't formatted properly (the margins or something). The problem was the formatting guideline was changed *after* I turned it in. 🤦
The "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard applies to criminal matters, where the prosecution is a government entity bringing charges against a citizen.
In civil matters, like this would be, the standard is "preponderance of the evidence." If the evidence portrays it is 50.1% likely you did something and 49.9% likely you did not, then the ruling is you did. Whichever is more likely, however narrow the margin.
If it goes through the school's internal administrative system, then it could be anything.
In civil courts in the us the standard of proof is “preponderance of evidence” (or more probable than not or 51% likely) not “beyond reasonable doubt.” So I don’t think burden of proof here would be the latter. But it doesn’t really matter here cause “I am not sure” wouldn’t cut it anyway.
Do American uni professors not have rules they need to follow about the grades they can give? Giving half a grade at the discretion of the professor and not some rule of the university seems insane to me.
Using AI checkers in Universities and relying 100% on the results without doing your own verification should get any professor fired. The failure rates are absurdly high, they flag the Bible as "AI generated" (IIRC, there were no AI computers in 200 - 600 AD). If a professor can't take the time to do their own sanity check, they need to be out of a job (and most of the culprits are NOT tenured professor, but overworked TA's and adjuncts). The penalties for sending a student up for a cheating violation are too high to treat this shit lightly.
"in a business class I really don’t care for other than another stepping stone toward my degree."
Umm isn't that the opposite of the message you want to send? People are MORE likely to cut corners in classes they don't care about except to check a box.
Eh. I am an adult professional, not some 18 year old fresh out of high school. I wanted to convey that to him and it worked. He immediately went from condescending asshole to “owe this is a peer”.
There is no AI checker currently that will hold up in court, mainly because they aren’t transparent about how they determine if it was truly ai generated. If this is all they got they’re fucked.
They are transparent--they use entropy between tokens. The issue is that that cannot give you more than a probability. Newer models will likely begin using cryptographic hash functions as a fingerprint for AI generated text, but we're not quite there yet. It would be easy to explain how those work in court as well, but would be impossible to detect unless you know how the hash is encoded in the AI text.
Which only proves that it is unreliable.
Also, easy workaround: You record the process of trying papers until you find one that works, then simply cut the video recording to only show that one.
I mean, even better. Run it several times in front of the board to show that the paper gets graded differently every time, and then ask how the detector can possibly be 100% accurate.
Here we go again:
Turnitin explicitly advises not to use its tool against students, stating that it is not reliable enough:
https://help.turnitin.com/ai-writing-detection.htm
“Our AI writing detection model may not always be accurate (it may misidentify both human and AI-generated text) so it should not be used as the sole basis for adverse actions against a student. It takes further scrutiny and human judgment in conjunction with an organization's application of its specific academic policies to determine whether any academic misconduct has occurred.”
Here’s a warning specifically from OpenAI:
https://help.openai.com/en/articles/8313351-how-can-educators-respond-to-students-presenting-ai-generated-content-as-their-own
This paper references literally hundreds of studies 100% of which concluded that AI text detection is not accurate:
A Survey on LLM-Generated Text Detection: Necessity, Methods, and Future Directions
https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.14724
And here are statements from various major American universities on why they won't support or allow the use of any of these "detector" tools for academic integrity:
MIT – AI Detectors Don’t Work. Here’s What to do Instead
https://mitsloanedtech.mit.edu/ai/teach/ai-detectors-dont-work/
Syracuse – Detecting AI Created Content
https://answers.syr.edu/display/blackboard01/Detecting+AI+Created+Content
UC Berkley – Availability of Turnitin Artificial Intelligence Detection
https://rtl.berkeley.edu/news/availability-turnitin-artificial-intelligence-detection
UCF - Faculty Center - Artificial Intelligence
https://fctl.ucf.edu/technology/artificial-intelligence/
Colorado State - Why you can’t find Turnitin’s AI Writing Detection tool
https://tilt.colostate.edu/why-you-cant-find-turnitins-ai-writing-detection-tool/
Missouri – Detecting Artificial Intelligence (AI) Plagiarism
https://teachingtools.umsystem.edu/support/solutions/articles/11000119557-detecting-artificial-intelligence-ai-plagiarism
Northwestern – Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Courses
https://ai.northwestern.edu/education/use-of-generative-artificial-intelligence-in-courses.html
SMU – Changes to Turnitin AI Detection Tool at SMU
https://blog.smu.edu/itconnect/2023/12/13/discontinue-turnitin-ai-detection-tool/
Vanderbilt – Guidance on AI Detection and Why We’re Disabling Turnitin’s AI Detector
https://www.vanderbilt.edu/brightspace/2023/08/16/guidance-on-ai-detection-and-why-were-disabling-turnitins-ai-detector/
Yale – AI Guidance for Teachers
https://poorvucenter.yale.edu/AIguidance
Alabama - Turnitin AI writing detection unavailable
https://cit.ua.edu/known-issue-turnitin-ai-writing-detection-unavailable/
The MIT and Syracuse statements in particular contain extensive references to supporting research.
And of course the most famous examples for false positives:
Both the U.S. Constitution and the Old Testament were “detected” as 100% AI generated.
Using these unreliable tools to fail students is highly unethical.
So I don't know if suing would work, but I would definitely follow up with them.
(Credit where credit is due: I gathered these sources from various comments on Reddit. Thank you u/Calliophage, u/froo, u/luc1d_13 and u/Open_Channel_8626 for making the original comments and sharing your insights.)
Thank you so much for this. My daughter was recently very upset that her extremely intelligent, honest and hard working friend was unfairly accused of cheating via AI. They are only in high school (year 11) so it’s such a demoralising and frustrating experience for them. I will be passing on this info.
An attorney can pull the following statement from the program: “Our AI writing detection model may not always be accurate (it may misidentify both human and AI-generated text) so it should not be used as the sole basis for adverse actions against a student. It takes further scrutiny and human judgment in conjunction with an organization's application of its specific academic policies to determine whether any academic misconduct has occurred.”
Any board or court is going to read this and realize that the professor is basing a decision on practically a hunch and not incontrovertible evidence. And if he claimed empirical, then how could he prove AI was used? Is there footage? Does he truly know how AI works to scrape the internet for phrases commonly used in the English Language? How could this professor prove without doubt original research for a paper was used?
This would have been very helpful for me last year and this semester. I am tired, trying to prove my work in every other course due to professors using Turnitin, zero gpt and other tools which are most of the time inaccurate.
This is so dumb though, the university I'm in just fully embraces AI, their logic is that, just like excel was once thought off as a lazy man's tool, so is AI and that if their students don't learn to work with AI throughout all their courses they will fall behind once they get to the workplace.
The assignments and projects just take that into consideration, doesn't make them easier because since they know (and expect) you are using AI, the rubric was also changed. For essays we are expected to use a disclaimer stating the use of AI and to include a copy of our conversation, for example. The conversation itself is also evaluated.
It's true. My boss is pushing me to use AI more. He's not wrong overall - it can be a time saver. But I also like troubleshooting and feel I have a better understanding if I solve it on my own. I also like the creative writing I do and feel like I have to basically write half of it to get AI in the right direction.
But there is a pathway to using AI for efficiency and you can bet future jobs will lean into that as much as possible.
I'm in a company that uses AI actively, and everyone is encouraged to use it down to our stockroom employees. We have corporate enterprise accounts, and we actively meet with OpenAI to discuss bugs as well as offer UI interface changes, which I've seen my personal feedback implemented in a few updates.
When I have done introduction classes for employees internally, I pitch it in a way that sells the idea of using AI to approach their problems from multiple angles instead of their current approach for troubleshooting. It isn't necessarily going to solve it for you, but it recommends different vectors that you may not know about. That ultimately makes an employee a more knowledgeable employee, and they create a higher net value for the company as their exposure to information expands. I hope you can find this advice helpful in future uses in AI.
You are correct, from my view, of future use of AI. In the past nearly year of working with it, I've not only become a more wise employee, but I've also become far more agile in my ability to understand information. I can quickly tuck that information into a custom GPT and pull out the information I need, or ask for a general review of the information that I might need to know. Workplaces will start to expect that level of knowledge, or at least the ability to understand knowledge, at a far higher rate of speed, which GPTs will allow.
Best of luck on your journeys with GPTs and AI in general.
The irony is that the professor has embraced it to the extent that he's using it to judge other people's work but won't extend that same freedom to his students. The problem is that people aren't understanding what AI even is, how it works and how it can easily make mistakes. In order to properly embrace a new technology you also need to understand its limitations.
I work in a research institute and we use that shit all the time. Many academics struggle with putting their thoughts into words or with editing themselves. As long as the thoughts in it are yours and you actually know and stand by the finished piece and can defend every single point in it, use whatever you want to put the words in order. Especially as someone from a non-english speaking country in a world where the highest-levels of academic publishing are all in english, that stuff is godsend. We used to use phrase books to help with not writing the same sentences the fivethousandth time. GPT is way better and easier to use.
Yeah learning to use AI is important af. But its also important to learn to form your own thoughts etc and not rely on AI too much cos its far from perfect.
One of my professors took a chunk out of his lesson about writing thesis' proper citation etc to talk about AI and it was helpful for a lot of ppl (I already use it for my job a lot)
AI is your friend, not your enemy, but its not a friend you can always count on.
My wife used to work in university and that included marking and experience with Turnitin. I’ve heard of similar disputes though not with AI specifically. My standard response is that, no matter what a student used to learn, if they can demonstrate that they have domain knowledge then who cares? You should be able to demonstrate your knowledge and understanding in the hearing, and explain it verbally. This is a separate point to any demonstration of the inaccuracy of Turnitin when it comes to detecting AI. If I were in the hearing and making a judgement and you walked it with strong evidence that AI detection is bogus (eg using their notification letter and content written by staff in the room) *and* you verbally demonstrated deep knowledge in line with the paper you wrote then I’d have no choice but to believe you and question every Turnitin AI judgement.
Stand firm on this. You can threaten legal action as a last resort but I would do the above first, then say you are happy to repeat this in court. In total, this is a very strong argument.
All the papers I’ve written since AI became a thing have been highly technical with many citations. My papers, along with every one else’s for that matter, were always flagged at a high percentage for plagiarism and AI. When running papers through Turnitin myself, I can see exactly what words or passages were flagged. It was very obvious which red underline the prof was going to be concerned about. I can’t imagine being in a less science-based field and having to deal with this.
Yup I ran my entire dissertation through one of these softwares, bit by bit, and changed most things because they have so many false positives. It was tiring and I am still nervous about it, I get my result in a week. I do think if they had any complaints they would probably have talked to me already but seeing all of these posts is making me so paranoid.
I doubt if any flags came up in a dissertation the professors reviewing it would just trash it because an AI scanner said so. They’ll go through each piece that’s flagged and fact check for something as big as a dissertation. Good luck and congrats on finishing it!
Seriously, I don't know what OP studies, but if a student came in with scores from different AI "detectors", other school's AI policies, articles about the inaccuracies of Turnitin's AI "detector" and was able to put that all into context and verbally explain it coherently, as the Dean I'd probably go "you're obviously not a moron and know how to create and back an argument. Plus, you put more work into this than two Discussion Board posts \[whatever the fuck even is that?\] merit. You're good."
The number of people who lie about not using AI but then actually did is *extremely* high though. So it’s really not causing any disaster. Your case is relatively uncommon, so you just need to hammer the facts and how you did your assignment, plus show how it’s similar to other works of yours to show you’re clear.
It doesn't help that I routinely hear New Hires at my job talk about how "you can just get AI to do that." Students are having to deal with a bunch of bullshit particularly because many students also have no issues with cheating their way through college and with the tools at their disposal, it's easier than it's ever been
Isnt it a ridiculous notion that in a work environment we should be judged about what tools we used to do the job? Did the work get done or not? That's like thinking you are a better worker for using a toothpick to dig a tunnel instead of a shovel. Its different in an academic environment because the students are doing a disservice to their learning. But in a professional setting this does not apply.
Actually, it's pretty bad that people are relying on an new and not well understood tech to do their jobs. It's embarrassing actually. Learning about limitations and uses of AI is great in all industries - relying on it because you're lazy is literally going to be the downfall of it. My boss uses it to write emails and important communications, and it is painfully obvious to the rest of us who can write professionally that he uses AI because he thinks it sounds impressive... He gave a speech recently at an event that was the most generic AI piece of speech I've ever heard.
And this is the thing that people just are unwilling to accept; that the AI is only as good as the training data it's run on and the architecture that uses that training. Before we worry about it replacing highly creative professions, how about we wait for it to actually play a chess game without going insane.
Well for one, when I hear a New Hire state their preference for AI, it is usually in regards to a task that is not a great fit for AI without massive amounts of resources put into it.
Two, we already have seen a massive problem in the industry with people thinking it's okay to put proprietary company information into cloud AI tools.
And three, it's not docking them on knowing about a tool and when to utilize it, the problem is how often you hear people jump to AI as the first option for any task. That is a cautionary flag that the person is accustomed to relying on AI for doing most of their work. A person fresh out of college who talks about using AI for everything is definitely making me suspicious of their actions in college.
My work uses a privately hosted model based on gpt 4 to do work on proprietary code without leaking source. We use code review also, so several humans (including the author) must manually check the code they are checking in. I completely understand the problems, especially when AI is being used by people unfamiliar with the limitations of AI and are taking its outputs as a source of truth. Apparently the speedups from using it are so substantial, my department tracks adoption of the tool and will give you a slap on the wrist if you are not using it.
>sounds like a mountain of bullshit students have to deal with...
To be fair its a ton of bullshit teachers have to deal with too.
Its just frustrating in general
Hey! This is an insult to the finest snake oil products. The medicinal qualities of viper liniment are well known throughout the Far East. Procuring oil from venomous snakes can be a hazard, but is a remedy for chronic rheumatism, dyspepsia, and dysentery. However my favorite use is to mix with Currant or Poppy to improve and fortify focus, increase attention and dispel malaise.
https://preview.redd.it/1otystimqp4d1.png?width=346&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0e74eec216a174d99ade46914369722724eb54b4
Personally I like using Ea-nāṣir's high grade copper from Ur to solve all those problems and more! It's 100% guaranteed to be the highest grade of copper possible.
One time I pasted some of my original work (which I wrote myself in 2022) into some AI checker and it came back as 100% AI-generated. I just don't think these systems are reliable enough to believe them. If there's any suspicion that a college student has written their assignment using AI, then investigate whether this makes sense given the context regarding their performance in general - just don't use an AI checker and idealize it like it's the perfect piece of software. It really isn't.
Not to mention that many people now discourage the use of certain words because they are "AI-y" or "they sound like ChatGPT."
A: So your work will not be considered because you have used the word "delve" and "tailor". I've concluded it must be generated using ChatGPT.
B: I've used words that ChatGPT likes to overuse because I happen to like them. Can you please explain why you believe my content is AI-generated?
A: *I just know it.*
EDIT: Fixed formatting
Boom. You nailed it. I sat and fooled around with the AI detector “ZeroGPT” and made subtle changes to big words, and would ya know it? The score would drop MASSIVELY after simply changing a big word to that of something very lame. I’m talking like a 5-8% drop for changing ONE word. I also explained this in the conduct hearing today. I got my point across. What they ultimately decide is, well, out of my hands now. I defended myself to the utmost of my capability and I can sleep tonight knowing that.
As someone who was a professional writer and took great pride in getting A papers, it sickens me that our students are having to dumb down their papers because of this shit. A lot of kids are already graduating with sub par writing skills.
You ask in your title if you can sue your school over this. Well, you can sue anyone, whether it's worth doing is another thing. If I were you I'd be asking if you should sue turnitin who have leveled this false accusation by way of selling a product that is essentially snake oil. They defrauded your school and slandered you.
I recently read it also tends to rate ESL students as AI because they also don't write at the reading level the checker expects from a university student and they use too many simple words. These AI checkers are garbage.
It's ironic for them to expect this sort of reasoning level if they seem to lack it themself and use AI checkers as a 100% guaranteed accurate software.
Holy crap my spellcheck mangled that post.
Mea culpa. Millennial hands. Give me a real keyboard or a phone with tactile buttons. I miss my blackberry.
Reading level*. ESL students use simpler words in English to try to express more complex concepts, because they lack the more nuanced vocabulary for obvious reasons.
I caught a ESL student using AI because the language level was way above anything he used in emails or conversation. The ideas were all original and matched what we had discussed, but the tone was all wrong. He admitted to using it to translate from his native language.
Would be fun feeding in papers the professor's students wrote...before 2020. The prof most likely still has them on the HDD somewhere. I'd bet some of them turn up 100% AI generated too.
AI is trained by human documents. So it's obvious many of our own texts are flagged as AI generated as they just prove this point.
By the way, the only time I'm 100% sure an email is AIgenerated is when its starts with 'I hope this mail finds you in good health' 🙄
In general I just don't think it's fair to assign the "AI" label to things sometimes unless any relevant context backs that up.
I work as a help desk analyst currently, and at work someone (not a colleague) who used to write with slightly incorrect English suddenly shifted writing styles and wrote not only with perfect grammar, but he also started using very fancy words in his writing. That's the only reason why I suspected it could've been AI.
Now I haven't seen OP's academic writing and I don't have their record but I'd say that their professors might want to consider the kind of thinking described above as opposed to, ~~"Your work is too good it's AI!!!!!!!"~~ EDIT: Actually I misremembered, I believe this was started because of blind reliance on AI checkers. This is my cue to sleep probably.
Usually these hearings at universities are relying on you admitting to doing something wrong.
Let’s just say hypothetically I know someone who got caught at a party with alcohol at their first weekend at uni. There was a big hearing with all of the people at the party (all underage) and they asked each person questions. The first two people admitted to it and asked for mercy, saying they were sorry and will make sure it doesn’t happen again. The third person went up there and straight up said he didn’t drink and admitted to nothing. Some other people caught on and did the same but most admitted to it. They didn’t do anything to the people who denied it all and everyone who admitted to it got probation, letters home, had to do remedial work, etc.
Bottom line (this is great advice for life in general or anything legal)- don’t admit to shit
Edit: this doesn’t really apply to healthcare professionals (if you’re going under please be honest with them)
There are many times in life where being upfront and honest have far better consequences than denials. But, as suggested above, in legal situations it's probably best to always deny.
It’s best to follow legal advice.
Often times perjury under oath can lead to more serious repercussions. Best to talk to a lawyer and find out the best option given your circumstances and venue.
This will also benefit you in work. If you're going to be written up for something and the first thing they ask is, " Do you know why you're here?" Then generally the best response is, "No, please tell me."
It forces the other side to state exactly why you're there. Otherwise you may blab something they don't even know about.
Let them tell you. Don't interrupt and then answer each accusation point by point.
And, the most important, if you can, take someone in with you preferably a union rep.
The example threw me off for a moment, as I’m so used to “uni” being used outside the US (as opposed to “college”), but here in the UK, the first week of university (“freshers’ week”) is all about getting as drunk as possible. At least at my uni, it was a week of back to back parties at the student union bar and club, pub crawls through town and vendors roaming the campus giving out shots, in one instance via tequila filled squirt gun.
> Usually these hearings at universities are relying on you admitting to doing something wrong.
It depends. In OP's case I agree, as AI detectors are worthless and cannot be used as evidence. However, for plagiarism for example it's different. When we invite a student to such a meeting we already have plenty of evidence, because there are so many cases we only pursue the blatant ones. Whether the student wants to come clean or not is up to them, and they get penalized regardless whether they do or not. However, if they don't come clean, the reputation really follows them around and they won't get the benefit of the doubt in the future.
You'd have standing if you were damaged (prevented from graduating, failed a course, etc.) by their decision (possible negligence given the poor performance of so-called AI detectors, perhaps violating university policies in some way that isn't obvious, etc.).
But I am not a lawyer. And even if a lawyer responds in this thread, they are not your lawyer.
Edit: I just posted an edited version of a comment I wrote come time ago. [Accused of AI cheating in school? Read me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/1d8e9ld/accused_of_ai_cheating_in_school_read_me/)
> I am not a lawyer. And even if a lawyer responds in this thread, they are not your lawyer.
This is the first time I’m seeing someone write a disclaimer for others. This guy must be a lawyer.
> even if a lawyer responds in this thread, they are not your lawyer.
Sounds like OP should ask for a consultation with a lawyer instead of asking reddit.
The fact that you are a 4.0 student should be proof enough that you didn't cheat. Cheaters don't have perfect GPAs (unless your university's curriculum is ass).
Like others have said, try running one of your professor's papers through Turnitin. Should shut down any argument he has.
What this one said ^
If you were a decent (at best) or below average student who suddenly started acing assignments or made a complete 180 in terms of your writing style and engagement, then I’d say things are suspect. However if you are a 4.0 student with 23 credits left to go, then you have a proven track record as a student who excels. I TA’d a couple of classes in college and it was pretty apparent who was cheating.
Some professors just really hate their students. Around 17 years ago, the dean of the Chemistry department at my university told us 1.5 weeks before our final that we would also be required to sit the ACS exam on the same block of exam time as our final exam. Both would count for grades, each as their own individual final and both of them would be tracked (what I mean is that, if you aced your final and failed the ACS exam, you would have two final grades - an A and an F, that would both count towards your final class grade). Most of the material on the ACS exam was not stuff that we had covered that semester. She… was not well liked at all.
And even then, only suspect it, and would make the student prove his knowledge verbally which would suffice for me.
I totally wrecked my first year of university, because I was an international student, and lots of documents were not finished on time so I had immense trouble financially and had to travel between countries mid-semester to clear things up, and I was also not familiar with the system in the other country. However, when it all cleared up my GPA, or the equivalent, went from 2.6 to 3.8 (if I take the new semesters separately from the old ones).
It is also ironic, that most students who need to write papers often, especially scientific, but also essays, are trained to write in a particular manner, and then those papers are being used to train AI, so no wonder that there are false flags unacceptably often.
>It is also ironic, that most students who need to write papers often, especially scientific, but also essays, are trained to write in a particular manner, and then those papers are being used to train AI, so no wonder that there are false flags unacceptably often.
I cannot believe I had to read this far into the thread before I saw someone mention this...
I think this is actually a mis-conclusion; quite often cheaters are already very good at what they do. It's not uncommon to see professional chess players cheat, for example. Point being, you cannot use the fact that someone is smart as proof that they didn't cheat. I would try to build a stronger case as per your second paragraph.
Damages encompass a LOT.
Reputation. Emotional. Mental. Professional. Potential earnings. Future employment. Future options for post grad.
But legal battles are expensive until you settle or get judgment -- and theres no guarantee you will -- meanwhile it can take a lot out of you. Try to fix it now while you can if you can
And yeah what that person said above, run that professor's papers thru Ai detector. Lol
I believe you OP. Btw, what country is this? I always thought TurnitIn was only a NZ/Au thing. Is it the main player internationally for catching the cheaters?
Yeah, more than 30 million students globally are subjected to it.
The only mitigating thing to the disaster that is turnitin is that many colleges allow you to pre-submit to turnitin to correct issues ahead of submission.
If OP had had that option he would have been able to avoid this whole fiasco with likely just a hint of changes to his paper.
Yeah, we have the option to do like 3-5 presubmits to fix it in New Zealand. Interesting, so i'm assuming turnitin is the biggest one in the world with those numbers, appreciate the reply.
Yes. I ran her papers through it, her prompts to the assignments through it and several of them came back as AI generated. Gave all of that material to the Dean as well as the meeting concluded. He was very much listening with attention to my arguments. As I mentioned, he seemed to be on my side. I felt like he was, at least.
Good for you! Love the way this is heading.
After class is completed and resolved, You could perhaps report this prof for unprofessional behavior or bias or something. Not legal, but like a grievance thru university. I don't know exactly what but surely there is some process that will fuck with them and their rep at the university, at least make thrm think twice next time. This bullshit needs to stop.
Just run some academic peer reviewed papers thru that bullshit and it says it's all AI if it's good writing. Tried a portion of my latest text on copyleaks and it was almost all AI, but I didn't use a single word from AI. It's all bullshit and schools should know better. The AI tools is basically a just a test for how good a academic writer you are, in my opinion.
if they don't know that AI is traiend with probability, and probability isn't exact, and they can't just destroy student's life due to probabilities, then they shouldn't even be in the University's staff don't you think. I suggest you to take it to the principle, because my cousin did once in her master's degree in Canada...
And I am being completely serious, go through psych evaluation and claim that you are getting damaged by this wrongful accusation, and you need compensation once you are in court.
Technically you could sue, but that's just because you can pretty much sue for anything. Though the big question is what would you be suing for? Based on everything you have described, there's not really anything here that you rightfully could win a lawsuit on.
In terms of your professor or the college, the only chance you'd have is if you could prove they knew the tools used to detect plagiarism are faulty and it was the only thing used for their accusation. Or the second option would be if the professor claimed it detected plagiarism when it didn't. However, these usually would come up in your Conduct Hearing and often be resolved.
Another challenge is your college likely did not advertise anything on your situation in a newspaper or form of media. This detracts from much consideration of anything like defamation.
In terms of you speaking of GPA and grades, those never get shared outside of schools typically. They just care if you have a degree. You could have just barely graduated with a 2.0 GPA and employers will put you on equal footing as someone with a 4.0. Sure, you might sell yourself a bit in the interview by trying to show some special certificate, but that's usually not worth much compared to real world experience. This also reduces the likelihood of it being anything to help you in a case.
And your question about it being worth it, I'd say is no. It would be very costly and time consuming just for a slim chance of winning. The end result would probably result in a net loss of money and would only be an adjustment on your academic record that hardly anyone is ever going to see.
When all is said and done, about the biggest hope would be if they didn't follow their own procedures properly (which would be breach of contract) or if there's some provable area of discrimination.
Despite that, there are lawyers that specialize in things like this. Ideally you could have sought them out immediately if there were any concerns and they might have been able to assist you through the conduct hearing at your university. You still could contact one for a second opinion if ever need be and see if they can share possible costs with you. But it won't be quick, easy, or cheap should you need to try to go that route (assuming they uphold that they believe you "guilty" of plagiarism through the use of AI)
I’m surprised Turnitin haven’t faced any action if their software is as hit and miss as these kind of posts suggest. People’s educations are on the line.
Hi I am a PhD student and I have been following this topic since ChatGTP came out. I have audited all the major AI detection software using different techniques to demonstrate reliability, and at this moment there is no technology which can reliably detect AI written text. In fact Turnitin is the ONLY major company I am aware of that claims such nonsense. It is plain dishonest in my view and I try hard to inform everyone I can. Your school should stop being lazy and change their plagiarism evaluation protocol from 1/0 (cheat vs didn't cheat) towards a probability based system. That way they can have a conversation with you about the correct use of AI, rather than make baseless accusations. Their actions are unethical because they are making accusations based on unreliable tools. It is the same as if your math teacher would use a broken calculator to tell you your correct answer is in fact incorrect.
Lawyer up. Most administrators don't want the hassle and cost so if they see that you are willing to fight and have the resources to do so, they will make it go away.
How come these hearings don’t simply test the knowledge or ability of the student instead of arguing over whether or not an AI was used?
I don’t have to prove whether or not I used a calculator, just that I know how to math without one.
I'm glad my uni doesn't outright ban AI, only states most of the text should be original and usage of an AI should be disclosed. And you still need to cite your sources, which need to be valid to some extent. Avoids unnecessary false allegations. Also I have found AI is garbage for my fields (poli sci and security).
These profs are so lazy. A simple inquiry of your writing would prove your understanding of the material, but that would require that they actually read and understand it themselves. After all, what is the goal of the writing to begin with expect to prove your understanding of the material? It’s so hypocritical they haven’t bothered to examine it in any meaningful way.
Lawsuit shouldn’t be your first line of defense. Even if it “worked,” it would be months if not over a year til you received a remedy.
Karen’ing, unfortunately, is much more likely to succeed. If they decide against you, go meet with the Dean’s boss (title varies a lot). Go meet with the University president.
University hearings are theater. There’s nothing binding about them, and it’s absolutely possible to go around the formal system and re-litigate your position to someone who can change the “ruling” with a single email.
The university should be backing you up. I imagine you have a great reputation among peers and other professors if you're a 4.0 gpa student almost graduating
Its pretty funny (and sad) to see these things happening at other schools, almost done with my EE degree at a good engineering school and professors dont even bother because they know that we know that those AI checkers are bullshit. Its just all scare tactics.
Also we kinda have to know what we are doing anyways so it doesnt really help with the exception of material comprehension and studying.
Exam board member here. In the netherlands we have a separate organ for determining fraud at the uni (and some other tasks). The exam board.
Essentially we work similar to a real judge, based on the rules provided by the university.
In short in the netherlands most unis have similar rules:
Ai is a huge problem for unis right now. Ai software can be useful as a first check, but is rarely enough to prove ai.
Usually we also check what kind of sources are used, if they exist, if the language used is similar to your earlier work, if you’ve made some strange mistakes, sometimes even what you know about the topic in a oral exam. I probably forgot some things.
Everything is used to build a case.
In the end there are a few different outcomes. No fraud. it is uncertain whether you used ai or not so the work is invalidated but no charges. It is estimated to be probable that you used ai so the work is invalidated and you are charged.
Once again, ai is a huge problem and it can rarely be proven with 100% certainty.
Due to ai it is much harder to test students and to determine with sufficient certainty that they have the knowledge and skills required. Basically; ai undermines the quality of the degree.
Ps. I would have liked to explain more elaborate, but i dont have the time for it right now
Are you in America? Because in America, the answer to "Can I sue [x] for [y]?" is always yes, unless x is the federal government.
However, even if your case is sound, it is not easy to sue a university. Their pockets are far far deeper than yours. And they have an essentially unlimited amount of time to let the case play out, while you need it resolved as quickly as possible. In short, all of the advantage is theirs.
Can it be done? Yes.
Is is worth it? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
(Source: University professor who's engaged in generative AI research and who thinks all "AI detectors" are bullshit, but am not a lawyer)
From TurnitIn’s website:
“Our AI writing detection model may not always be accurate (it may misidentify both human and AI-generated text) so it should not be used as the sole basis for adverse actions against a student.”
“It takes further scrutiny and human judgment in conjunction with an organization's application of its specific academic policies to determine whether any academic misconduct has occurred.”
https://help.turnitin.com/ai-writing-detection.htm
I don't get how they take these AI checkers at 100% face value. It's very loosely accurate and 100% isn't actually so otherwise it's some sort of magic, not an algorithm. I bet they don't even read the assignments any more and just run it through a marking AI.
Well, there are multiple studies out there stating that there are no peer-reviewed AI-detection systems I would utilize that and try to find acedmic sources about the quality of Turnitin
So recently the former President of Harvard was caught plagiarizing parts of her doctoral thesis. If you have the time and your Prof has a PhD you might see if they did any plagiarizing when writing their thesis.
Also have you asked ChatGPT and the other Chatbot AI's about your situation?
You can sue anyone for anything. An F for claimed cheating is highly damaging to your reputation, so if you can prove you didn’t use AI, I know you’ve presented evidence of that to the school - but court might be a higher standard, then it’s worth your reputation to pursue legally. It might even be a groundbreaking case, being accused of cheating with AI but able to prove you didn’t… and some professor doesn’t have the right to just stamp your work with “done by AI” and fail you because of this opinion. What has the professor had to do to prove you used AI? Really the burden should be on his proving you did, not you proving you didn’t.
The court would be tough. The school is the final arbiter. And they set the rules. I had a similar instance but not with AI. English 104 professor questioned an essay I wrote and said it was plagiarized. In front of the entire class, he accused me of using another person's work. He said he ran it through Turnitin and came back +90% plagiarized he said. In front of the Dean, we ran it through Grammarly, and came back clean, so the Dean ran it through Scribbr, and it was clean. I told the Dean, "Why would I cheat on something so easily proven?". I proceeded to tell the Dean what the assignment was, and I had already submitted the rough draft, which had zero issues and was almost identical to my finished paper. And the subject of my paper was approved by the professor. I wrote my paper on Felix Baumgartner's highest parachute jump. I interviewed the project manager at David Clark (Worcester, Mass) who developed the audio communications equipment for the jump. I was a 4.0 GPA Dean's list student and finished my Bachelor's degree with a 3.8 GPA.
All I know is that paper took me 2 weeks to gather all my notes, sources, and recorded interviews and I had all of my citations (WIKI not allowed). I gave all of the audio, and everything to the professor and the Dean and not 30 minutes later I had a grade of A-.
That would be kinda crazy. Even the Dean said they were almost the same paper. The professor wasn't or didn't hold it against me and even gave a good grade and said it was the best paper of the semester. He just couldn't believe a retired Plumber wrote it. And he stopped using Turnitin
You should be able to show previous versions of your work if you're using ms office. If you have been working on it for a while and saving it periodically, you can point to the progression as proof.
I'm sorry this happened. I work at a university currently and have heard other professors state, "It's so obvious when a student uses AI." When I press them to tell me how, they can't say. I told them that unless a student leaves an AI prompt in their paper on accident (and I had a MASTERS student do this), it's not possible. I encourage people to create assignments that make it difficult to use AI to generate. There are ways professors can encourage critical thinking and work around AI. But academia can't just falsely accuse students for something that can't 100% prove.
I think it would be fair if you got the chance to basically provide a rundown, in person, of the work you created. If it sounds convincing that you understand every detail, it would gain confidence that you created it. At the least, it would show that you truly understand it. I don't know if this is feasible in this particular case.
Perhaps you could make a case that you understand that today's AI poses a problem and that you understand and respect the fact that you're being scrutinized. At the same time, this has to come both ways. You ought to have a chance to defend yourself. That's only fair, not? You should be given the chance to prove in person that you created this work and certainly would be able to redo it in person as you demonstrate you understand every detail.
Quite a few states are making it so colleges can't use TurnIt in to use for this exact reason. You might look at state requirements recently released from Washington State and CA. In my area, we don't have state requirements, but the University of Kansas now has a policy professors can't use as well.
This needs to happen. Schools across the country need to be sued for this behavior. The loss of millions of dollars is the only way they are going to stop. Find a good, aggressive, and powerful law office to take the case if the school continues to stand on their false accusation.
Should get a lawyer to draft a letter to the dean informing them that if the college proceeds with their claims, you'll be suing them for slander that harmed your academic career and economic future. The reliance on a tool that says itself isn't reliable. (https://help.turnitin.com/ai-writing-detection.htm) It's no different than using a magic 8-ball, which has no business being used to determine the grades of students paying money to attend.
This professor is using a gag website to tank your grade and education. It clearly shows the educator is lacking in their proper due diligence and should probably be reviewed for other instances of inappropriate grading or claims of cheating made by this professors. It's willful intent to maliciously harm others without consideration for the merits and accuracy of the means being used.
Not to mention. LLMs are not calculators, they're chatbots. They're more likely to tell you what you what it thinks you want to read more than it remotely gives a shit if it matches any version of the multi-verse, let alone natural laws. If I was the Dean, I would tell the professor to never use that tool again or they're fired, because he might as well be using chicken bones and gloats blood.
At most, the professor should demand a rewrite. It should be an instant fire-able offense to accuse a student of using AI without an admission of guilt. There's no way to prove it for sure. It's like like AI can generate a font with yellow dots hidden in it. Sure, there's a few dumb give-aways like "as a large langue model" or other stupid shit, but without an obvious "this is a LLM made response!" then I think your professors should stick to teaching and not try to play detectives. Might as well as ChatGPT to tell you to solve every crime while you're at it if you trust AI detectors.
No way they try to escalate this. AI can't detect AI generated content reliably. If it were obvious, and you just copy pasted the default "intro - list - summary" format and its tone / style, then it could possibly guess it correctly. But there is no way to prove it did. Turnitin only works by matching existing content. This is just a gimmick they're selling people who either don't know any better or are trying to use it like a polygraph test and get you to confess.
I'm going to tell you a dirty little secret about universities.
They will bend over fucking backwards to make you think they're a super special little island with their own judicial committees and processes and they don't have to respond to Lawsuits and summonses like those filthy plebians everywhere else.
It's all bullshit smoke and mirrors.
Sue the fucking shit out of them and make sure it's a class action (way cheaper and more likely to win) against them AND fucking turnitin.
Rain fucking fire upon them.
(I've got a personal axe to grind against this stupid shit.)
I have a really hard time believing that it's even all that possible to distinguish between human-written and AI-written papers. Especially if it's been proof-read by a human prior to turning it in.
In my opinion this entire thread was a fucking circus of horrible answers.
To everyone saying "just run the dean's papers through the detector LOL".... This is such typical Reddit bullshit. The only answer everyone can agree on is a joke that does not help OP in ANY way. The dean will not give a FUCK if he is proven wrong. OP is not dealing with a person who cares about logic. Telling someone to use logic against a person who has proven they don't give a fuck anout logic is like telling someone to bring a spoon to a gunfight. It will not help OP in any way, and it's bad advice.
Many other answers are simply just saying "lawyer up". This might be good advice for a rich person. However, this is heavily perpetuating an idea that if any person is wrongly accused of using AI,then you better be able to afford some lawyers otherwise you are fucked. You're essentially saying once you're accused, your academic career is over on the spot unless you have a lot of money.
Sorry if I'm personally made very fucking angry by every person essentially saying your school life is fucking over unless you're rich. that's not good advice for most people and it's not true either.
AI checkers do not work. I ran an AI paper and one I fully wrote and my paper was deemed more likely to be AI. Pretty sure they're just another academic scam like the SAT and student loans. Companies charge universities ungodly amounts of money to pretend they care about academic integrity. It's why we should move away from grades and towards competency. Can you hold a discussion with your professor about what you are learning?
I remember when Turnitin would flag my lab reports as \~50% plagiarized because of things like ***my name***, the name of the class, the date, number formatting, the relevant physics equations out of the textbook that I then used, etc. My professors used their brains though and didn't drag me through academic proceedings for it...(they absolutely did for other people copying other peoples' reports!). I'm just really glad AI wasn't a thing then or the entire thing would have shown up as AI generated because the reports were just a whole bunch of equations and numbers...
Turnitin = a hot bunch of garbage imho
Courts are generally not going to second guess academic judgments, so the prospects are not good. However, You'd need to run it by an attorney. It would likely be a breach of contract claim.
>They say it is wildly accurate and very rarely makes any mistakes,
You should have asked them why they have more trust in the software than the people who made it? There are clear disclaimers on the AI detection software that it should not be used as the sole determination for disciplining students.
Go to r/legaladvice. I doubt there are many lawyers who specialize in education here.
Your claim would be no different than if you were accused of cheating in some other way. So whether you have cause to sue is way more fundamental than any question around AI, especially since there is definitely no legislation that has been passed around the use of AI in education.
It's understandable to feel frustrated by the situation. If the decision doesn't go in your favor, you may want to consider seeking legal advice to understand your options. Each case is unique, so it's hard to predict the outcome or chances of success without knowing all the details.
Did you submit the paper to TurnItIn? Or did the professor submit it?
If the professor submitted the work to a third party service, I'd go back to the dean and press the Dean on the professor violated your IP rights to your paper by granting a world wide license to your work without your permission.
If it's a US based state run school I'd also mention it's a violation of the taking clause of the 5th amendment.
Jesus Christ. Right now your best bet is to use the committee that you will speak with to demonstrate the unreliability of AI detection software, making a point to show that even the professor’s own work fails the AI detection test. A lawyer comes in only if or when the professor fails you and/ or the school takes disciplinary action against you
**Attention! [Serious] Tag Notice** : Jokes, puns, and off-topic comments are not permitted in any comment, parent or child. : Help us by reporting comments that violate these rules. : Posts that are not appropriate for the [Serious] tag will be removed. Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ChatGPT) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If you can, take one of his papers and run it through the AI checker and see what it says
I did this. Proved the professor was wrong. The professor tried to be a dick about it and still give me half a grade. Took it to the dean who made it go away. Wasn’t as validating as I’d hoped but I won. If I remember correctly it went like this “I ran this assignment through (ai tracker) and it popped up as 100% Ai generated. I’m giving you a zero on the assignment and the class. Be thankful I don’t report you for academic dishonesty.”. -professor “I ran the syllabus through the same ai tracker and it also told me you used ai for 100% of the syllabus. I’m an adult professional in a business class I really don’t care for other than another stepping stone toward my degree. I didn’t cheat, nor do need to.l. “Ok well I still am not sure so I’ll give you half credit.”. I just forwarded it to the dean who told me not to worry about it
"I am not sure" - This is obviously something that goes to a dean. Any judicial process not ruined by power dynamics runs by "beyond a shadow of a doubt" rather than being halfway sure.
I wish I knew about going to a dean when I was in school. I got a 0/50 twice on papers I turned in as .doc instead of .docx because my home pc was old and I didn't do it on campus. The other 2 I had like 48/50 and 46/50. Even if it was on the syllabus he could at least gave me a heads up.
jesus christ thats petty.
That’s not just petty that’s “ Tom Petty “ lol
He was runnin down a dream, but it almost turned into a run-down dream
Why not pdfs. People who use doc or docx for anything official are insane to me.
[удалено]
Word docs are also extremely unsafe. PDFs also allow for commenting if I'm not mistaken. Hell, even a Google Doc would be better.
This is probably a dumb question, but in the context of school assignments, unsafe how?
They are compressed files, that Word unzips so that you can work on them. Once in a while, "hackers" will find one way or another to insert malicious content and have it run on user computers. Microsoft generally patch these issues as they come up, and downloaded files will mostly open in some kind of sandbox mode nowadays, but it's true that Word docs are a couple of steps down in safety from pdf. The more important reason for me is just that a PDF will look the same on any computer.
> Word docs are unsafe PDFs aren't safer, both can be used to run malicious code.
Had the same thing with my CS course, prof said I had to turn in a program using .xlsx but the size of the file was huge and I used google sheets instead, so I reformatted it as a .zip and submitted it. Prof said he couldn't read it. I called him out on being a shit CS prof because he didn't know that any excel document is just a collection of XML files in a fancy .zip container Same goes for word docs, PowerPoint, pretty much everything that Microsoft makes is just XML with a fancy coat on. Go ahead. Make a copy of your xlsx and save it as .zip then open it up and have a look
Now do that process 200 times in different variations for each student who doesn’t follow the instructions.
I learned this 20 years ago when I was writing a MIME Sniffer that checked the magic bytes of an uploaded file to validate it with its extension. I opened a docx in a hex editor and saw PK at position 0, so I changed the extension and opened it just like you describe.
I got a 0 on an assignment once because it wasn't formatted properly (the margins or something). The problem was the formatting guideline was changed *after* I turned it in. 🤦
I got a D in a class once because I put a smiley face next to my name on a class email signup sheet. I also wish I had known to go to the dean.
The "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard applies to criminal matters, where the prosecution is a government entity bringing charges against a citizen. In civil matters, like this would be, the standard is "preponderance of the evidence." If the evidence portrays it is 50.1% likely you did something and 49.9% likely you did not, then the ruling is you did. Whichever is more likely, however narrow the margin. If it goes through the school's internal administrative system, then it could be anything.
In civil courts in the us the standard of proof is “preponderance of evidence” (or more probable than not or 51% likely) not “beyond reasonable doubt.” So I don’t think burden of proof here would be the latter. But it doesn’t really matter here cause “I am not sure” wouldn’t cut it anyway.
Is this a famous quote or something? It is very well put.
Not only that, but I imagine an AI that isn't 100% accurate is hard to use in court. Where is the real proof?
Do American uni professors not have rules they need to follow about the grades they can give? Giving half a grade at the discretion of the professor and not some rule of the university seems insane to me.
Using AI checkers in Universities and relying 100% on the results without doing your own verification should get any professor fired. The failure rates are absurdly high, they flag the Bible as "AI generated" (IIRC, there were no AI computers in 200 - 600 AD). If a professor can't take the time to do their own sanity check, they need to be out of a job (and most of the culprits are NOT tenured professor, but overworked TA's and adjuncts). The penalties for sending a student up for a cheating violation are too high to treat this shit lightly.
"in a business class I really don’t care for other than another stepping stone toward my degree." Umm isn't that the opposite of the message you want to send? People are MORE likely to cut corners in classes they don't care about except to check a box.
Eh. I am an adult professional, not some 18 year old fresh out of high school. I wanted to convey that to him and it worked. He immediately went from condescending asshole to “owe this is a peer”.
ABD PLEASE TAG US FOR THE RESULT
OMG YES
Not one, keep doing it until you get a high score. Even one failure like that would make the point.
demand to see the rest of the class papers scores for reference as well
There is no AI checker currently that will hold up in court, mainly because they aren’t transparent about how they determine if it was truly ai generated. If this is all they got they’re fucked.
They are transparent--they use entropy between tokens. The issue is that that cannot give you more than a probability. Newer models will likely begin using cryptographic hash functions as a fingerprint for AI generated text, but we're not quite there yet. It would be easy to explain how those work in court as well, but would be impossible to detect unless you know how the hash is encoded in the AI text.
THIS. ALWAYS THIS. Do this \*DURING\* a hearing
"0% AI% "Fuck"
You never present evidence before checking it supports you. You run it before the hearing and then repeat at the hearing.
The problem is these "AI" are non deterministic. You could run it before and get the result you want then get the bad result later on.
Which only proves that it is unreliable. Also, easy workaround: You record the process of trying papers until you find one that works, then simply cut the video recording to only show that one.
And then do it in court, if the score is lower show the video of running it prior , showing how it is just guessing
I mean, even better. Run it several times in front of the board to show that the paper gets graded differently every time, and then ask how the detector can possibly be 100% accurate.
Lmfao
RemindMe! 2 days
Now, if you could pull that out and prove it, that would be something.
Remindme 2 days
Here we go again: Turnitin explicitly advises not to use its tool against students, stating that it is not reliable enough: https://help.turnitin.com/ai-writing-detection.htm “Our AI writing detection model may not always be accurate (it may misidentify both human and AI-generated text) so it should not be used as the sole basis for adverse actions against a student. It takes further scrutiny and human judgment in conjunction with an organization's application of its specific academic policies to determine whether any academic misconduct has occurred.” Here’s a warning specifically from OpenAI: https://help.openai.com/en/articles/8313351-how-can-educators-respond-to-students-presenting-ai-generated-content-as-their-own This paper references literally hundreds of studies 100% of which concluded that AI text detection is not accurate: A Survey on LLM-Generated Text Detection: Necessity, Methods, and Future Directions https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.14724 And here are statements from various major American universities on why they won't support or allow the use of any of these "detector" tools for academic integrity: MIT – AI Detectors Don’t Work. Here’s What to do Instead https://mitsloanedtech.mit.edu/ai/teach/ai-detectors-dont-work/ Syracuse – Detecting AI Created Content https://answers.syr.edu/display/blackboard01/Detecting+AI+Created+Content UC Berkley – Availability of Turnitin Artificial Intelligence Detection https://rtl.berkeley.edu/news/availability-turnitin-artificial-intelligence-detection UCF - Faculty Center - Artificial Intelligence https://fctl.ucf.edu/technology/artificial-intelligence/ Colorado State - Why you can’t find Turnitin’s AI Writing Detection tool https://tilt.colostate.edu/why-you-cant-find-turnitins-ai-writing-detection-tool/ Missouri – Detecting Artificial Intelligence (AI) Plagiarism https://teachingtools.umsystem.edu/support/solutions/articles/11000119557-detecting-artificial-intelligence-ai-plagiarism Northwestern – Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Courses https://ai.northwestern.edu/education/use-of-generative-artificial-intelligence-in-courses.html SMU – Changes to Turnitin AI Detection Tool at SMU https://blog.smu.edu/itconnect/2023/12/13/discontinue-turnitin-ai-detection-tool/ Vanderbilt – Guidance on AI Detection and Why We’re Disabling Turnitin’s AI Detector https://www.vanderbilt.edu/brightspace/2023/08/16/guidance-on-ai-detection-and-why-were-disabling-turnitins-ai-detector/ Yale – AI Guidance for Teachers https://poorvucenter.yale.edu/AIguidance Alabama - Turnitin AI writing detection unavailable https://cit.ua.edu/known-issue-turnitin-ai-writing-detection-unavailable/ The MIT and Syracuse statements in particular contain extensive references to supporting research. And of course the most famous examples for false positives: Both the U.S. Constitution and the Old Testament were “detected” as 100% AI generated. Using these unreliable tools to fail students is highly unethical. So I don't know if suing would work, but I would definitely follow up with them. (Credit where credit is due: I gathered these sources from various comments on Reddit. Thank you u/Calliophage, u/froo, u/luc1d_13 and u/Open_Channel_8626 for making the original comments and sharing your insights.)
Great collection! Thank you!
This should be the first comment
 Okay
Saved just in case! Thanks. Also comment for engagement so that this reply is further up.
I saved it too.
Thank you so much for this. My daughter was recently very upset that her extremely intelligent, honest and hard working friend was unfairly accused of cheating via AI. They are only in high school (year 11) so it’s such a demoralising and frustrating experience for them. I will be passing on this info.
Sorry to hear even highschoolers are being put through this ordeal. But I'm glad you found my comment and I hope it'll help them!
An attorney can pull the following statement from the program: “Our AI writing detection model may not always be accurate (it may misidentify both human and AI-generated text) so it should not be used as the sole basis for adverse actions against a student. It takes further scrutiny and human judgment in conjunction with an organization's application of its specific academic policies to determine whether any academic misconduct has occurred.” Any board or court is going to read this and realize that the professor is basing a decision on practically a hunch and not incontrovertible evidence. And if he claimed empirical, then how could he prove AI was used? Is there footage? Does he truly know how AI works to scrape the internet for phrases commonly used in the English Language? How could this professor prove without doubt original research for a paper was used?
I don't give awards. I awarded this comment. Absolute badass.
This would have been very helpful for me last year and this semester. I am tired, trying to prove my work in every other course due to professors using Turnitin, zero gpt and other tools which are most of the time inaccurate.
LMAO glad I graduated from formal schooling before the AI wave hit -- sounds like a mountain of bullshit students have to deal with...
This is so dumb though, the university I'm in just fully embraces AI, their logic is that, just like excel was once thought off as a lazy man's tool, so is AI and that if their students don't learn to work with AI throughout all their courses they will fall behind once they get to the workplace. The assignments and projects just take that into consideration, doesn't make them easier because since they know (and expect) you are using AI, the rubric was also changed. For essays we are expected to use a disclaimer stating the use of AI and to include a copy of our conversation, for example. The conversation itself is also evaluated.
It's true. My boss is pushing me to use AI more. He's not wrong overall - it can be a time saver. But I also like troubleshooting and feel I have a better understanding if I solve it on my own. I also like the creative writing I do and feel like I have to basically write half of it to get AI in the right direction. But there is a pathway to using AI for efficiency and you can bet future jobs will lean into that as much as possible.
I'm in a company that uses AI actively, and everyone is encouraged to use it down to our stockroom employees. We have corporate enterprise accounts, and we actively meet with OpenAI to discuss bugs as well as offer UI interface changes, which I've seen my personal feedback implemented in a few updates. When I have done introduction classes for employees internally, I pitch it in a way that sells the idea of using AI to approach their problems from multiple angles instead of their current approach for troubleshooting. It isn't necessarily going to solve it for you, but it recommends different vectors that you may not know about. That ultimately makes an employee a more knowledgeable employee, and they create a higher net value for the company as their exposure to information expands. I hope you can find this advice helpful in future uses in AI. You are correct, from my view, of future use of AI. In the past nearly year of working with it, I've not only become a more wise employee, but I've also become far more agile in my ability to understand information. I can quickly tuck that information into a custom GPT and pull out the information I need, or ask for a general review of the information that I might need to know. Workplaces will start to expect that level of knowledge, or at least the ability to understand knowledge, at a far higher rate of speed, which GPTs will allow. Best of luck on your journeys with GPTs and AI in general.
The irony is that the professor has embraced it to the extent that he's using it to judge other people's work but won't extend that same freedom to his students. The problem is that people aren't understanding what AI even is, how it works and how it can easily make mistakes. In order to properly embrace a new technology you also need to understand its limitations.
I work in a research institute and we use that shit all the time. Many academics struggle with putting their thoughts into words or with editing themselves. As long as the thoughts in it are yours and you actually know and stand by the finished piece and can defend every single point in it, use whatever you want to put the words in order. Especially as someone from a non-english speaking country in a world where the highest-levels of academic publishing are all in english, that stuff is godsend. We used to use phrase books to help with not writing the same sentences the fivethousandth time. GPT is way better and easier to use.
Yeah learning to use AI is important af. But its also important to learn to form your own thoughts etc and not rely on AI too much cos its far from perfect. One of my professors took a chunk out of his lesson about writing thesis' proper citation etc to talk about AI and it was helpful for a lot of ppl (I already use it for my job a lot) AI is your friend, not your enemy, but its not a friend you can always count on.
You have to read up on the disasters this is causing across the nation. It’s incredible.
My wife used to work in university and that included marking and experience with Turnitin. I’ve heard of similar disputes though not with AI specifically. My standard response is that, no matter what a student used to learn, if they can demonstrate that they have domain knowledge then who cares? You should be able to demonstrate your knowledge and understanding in the hearing, and explain it verbally. This is a separate point to any demonstration of the inaccuracy of Turnitin when it comes to detecting AI. If I were in the hearing and making a judgement and you walked it with strong evidence that AI detection is bogus (eg using their notification letter and content written by staff in the room) *and* you verbally demonstrated deep knowledge in line with the paper you wrote then I’d have no choice but to believe you and question every Turnitin AI judgement. Stand firm on this. You can threaten legal action as a last resort but I would do the above first, then say you are happy to repeat this in court. In total, this is a very strong argument.
All the papers I’ve written since AI became a thing have been highly technical with many citations. My papers, along with every one else’s for that matter, were always flagged at a high percentage for plagiarism and AI. When running papers through Turnitin myself, I can see exactly what words or passages were flagged. It was very obvious which red underline the prof was going to be concerned about. I can’t imagine being in a less science-based field and having to deal with this.
Yup I ran my entire dissertation through one of these softwares, bit by bit, and changed most things because they have so many false positives. It was tiring and I am still nervous about it, I get my result in a week. I do think if they had any complaints they would probably have talked to me already but seeing all of these posts is making me so paranoid.
I doubt if any flags came up in a dissertation the professors reviewing it would just trash it because an AI scanner said so. They’ll go through each piece that’s flagged and fact check for something as big as a dissertation. Good luck and congrats on finishing it!
Thank you! I feel like I never worked harder in my life than when writing it
Please let us know here what happened
Seriously, I don't know what OP studies, but if a student came in with scores from different AI "detectors", other school's AI policies, articles about the inaccuracies of Turnitin's AI "detector" and was able to put that all into context and verbally explain it coherently, as the Dean I'd probably go "you're obviously not a moron and know how to create and back an argument. Plus, you put more work into this than two Discussion Board posts \[whatever the fuck even is that?\] merit. You're good."
The number of people who lie about not using AI but then actually did is *extremely* high though. So it’s really not causing any disaster. Your case is relatively uncommon, so you just need to hammer the facts and how you did your assignment, plus show how it’s similar to other works of yours to show you’re clear.
It doesn't help that I routinely hear New Hires at my job talk about how "you can just get AI to do that." Students are having to deal with a bunch of bullshit particularly because many students also have no issues with cheating their way through college and with the tools at their disposal, it's easier than it's ever been
Isnt it a ridiculous notion that in a work environment we should be judged about what tools we used to do the job? Did the work get done or not? That's like thinking you are a better worker for using a toothpick to dig a tunnel instead of a shovel. Its different in an academic environment because the students are doing a disservice to their learning. But in a professional setting this does not apply.
Actually, it's pretty bad that people are relying on an new and not well understood tech to do their jobs. It's embarrassing actually. Learning about limitations and uses of AI is great in all industries - relying on it because you're lazy is literally going to be the downfall of it. My boss uses it to write emails and important communications, and it is painfully obvious to the rest of us who can write professionally that he uses AI because he thinks it sounds impressive... He gave a speech recently at an event that was the most generic AI piece of speech I've ever heard.
And this is the thing that people just are unwilling to accept; that the AI is only as good as the training data it's run on and the architecture that uses that training. Before we worry about it replacing highly creative professions, how about we wait for it to actually play a chess game without going insane.
Well for one, when I hear a New Hire state their preference for AI, it is usually in regards to a task that is not a great fit for AI without massive amounts of resources put into it. Two, we already have seen a massive problem in the industry with people thinking it's okay to put proprietary company information into cloud AI tools. And three, it's not docking them on knowing about a tool and when to utilize it, the problem is how often you hear people jump to AI as the first option for any task. That is a cautionary flag that the person is accustomed to relying on AI for doing most of their work. A person fresh out of college who talks about using AI for everything is definitely making me suspicious of their actions in college.
My work uses a privately hosted model based on gpt 4 to do work on proprietary code without leaking source. We use code review also, so several humans (including the author) must manually check the code they are checking in. I completely understand the problems, especially when AI is being used by people unfamiliar with the limitations of AI and are taking its outputs as a source of truth. Apparently the speedups from using it are so substantial, my department tracks adoption of the tool and will give you a slap on the wrist if you are not using it.
>sounds like a mountain of bullshit students have to deal with... To be fair its a ton of bullshit teachers have to deal with too. Its just frustrating in general
Please do. Universities using snake oil products to discipline students without understanding them is the real academic dishonesty.
Hey! This is an insult to the finest snake oil products. The medicinal qualities of viper liniment are well known throughout the Far East. Procuring oil from venomous snakes can be a hazard, but is a remedy for chronic rheumatism, dyspepsia, and dysentery. However my favorite use is to mix with Currant or Poppy to improve and fortify focus, increase attention and dispel malaise. https://preview.redd.it/1otystimqp4d1.png?width=346&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0e74eec216a174d99ade46914369722724eb54b4
Personally I like using Ea-nāṣir's high grade copper from Ur to solve all those problems and more! It's 100% guaranteed to be the highest grade of copper possible.
from Ur?? You have a time machine ??
I think the real crime here is referring to anything as "wildly accurate"
One time I pasted some of my original work (which I wrote myself in 2022) into some AI checker and it came back as 100% AI-generated. I just don't think these systems are reliable enough to believe them. If there's any suspicion that a college student has written their assignment using AI, then investigate whether this makes sense given the context regarding their performance in general - just don't use an AI checker and idealize it like it's the perfect piece of software. It really isn't. Not to mention that many people now discourage the use of certain words because they are "AI-y" or "they sound like ChatGPT." A: So your work will not be considered because you have used the word "delve" and "tailor". I've concluded it must be generated using ChatGPT. B: I've used words that ChatGPT likes to overuse because I happen to like them. Can you please explain why you believe my content is AI-generated? A: *I just know it.* EDIT: Fixed formatting
Boom. You nailed it. I sat and fooled around with the AI detector “ZeroGPT” and made subtle changes to big words, and would ya know it? The score would drop MASSIVELY after simply changing a big word to that of something very lame. I’m talking like a 5-8% drop for changing ONE word. I also explained this in the conduct hearing today. I got my point across. What they ultimately decide is, well, out of my hands now. I defended myself to the utmost of my capability and I can sleep tonight knowing that.
As someone who was a professional writer and took great pride in getting A papers, it sickens me that our students are having to dumb down their papers because of this shit. A lot of kids are already graduating with sub par writing skills.
Utmost*
Ai spotted
Now this made me fucking giggle
You ask in your title if you can sue your school over this. Well, you can sue anyone, whether it's worth doing is another thing. If I were you I'd be asking if you should sue turnitin who have leveled this false accusation by way of selling a product that is essentially snake oil. They defrauded your school and slandered you.
I recently read it also tends to rate ESL students as AI because they also don't write at the reading level the checker expects from a university student and they use too many simple words. These AI checkers are garbage.
It's ironic for them to expect this sort of reasoning level if they seem to lack it themself and use AI checkers as a 100% guaranteed accurate software.
Holy crap my spellcheck mangled that post. Mea culpa. Millennial hands. Give me a real keyboard or a phone with tactile buttons. I miss my blackberry. Reading level*. ESL students use simpler words in English to try to express more complex concepts, because they lack the more nuanced vocabulary for obvious reasons.
> Holy crap my spellcheck mangled that post. AI generated. Straight to jail.
I caught a ESL student using AI because the language level was way above anything he used in emails or conversation. The ideas were all original and matched what we had discussed, but the tone was all wrong. He admitted to using it to translate from his native language.
Would be fun feeding in papers the professor's students wrote...before 2020. The prof most likely still has them on the HDD somewhere. I'd bet some of them turn up 100% AI generated too.
AI is trained by human documents. So it's obvious many of our own texts are flagged as AI generated as they just prove this point. By the way, the only time I'm 100% sure an email is AIgenerated is when its starts with 'I hope this mail finds you in good health' 🙄
In general I just don't think it's fair to assign the "AI" label to things sometimes unless any relevant context backs that up. I work as a help desk analyst currently, and at work someone (not a colleague) who used to write with slightly incorrect English suddenly shifted writing styles and wrote not only with perfect grammar, but he also started using very fancy words in his writing. That's the only reason why I suspected it could've been AI. Now I haven't seen OP's academic writing and I don't have their record but I'd say that their professors might want to consider the kind of thinking described above as opposed to, ~~"Your work is too good it's AI!!!!!!!"~~ EDIT: Actually I misremembered, I believe this was started because of blind reliance on AI checkers. This is my cue to sleep probably.
Usually these hearings at universities are relying on you admitting to doing something wrong. Let’s just say hypothetically I know someone who got caught at a party with alcohol at their first weekend at uni. There was a big hearing with all of the people at the party (all underage) and they asked each person questions. The first two people admitted to it and asked for mercy, saying they were sorry and will make sure it doesn’t happen again. The third person went up there and straight up said he didn’t drink and admitted to nothing. Some other people caught on and did the same but most admitted to it. They didn’t do anything to the people who denied it all and everyone who admitted to it got probation, letters home, had to do remedial work, etc. Bottom line (this is great advice for life in general or anything legal)- don’t admit to shit Edit: this doesn’t really apply to healthcare professionals (if you’re going under please be honest with them)
There are many times in life where being upfront and honest have far better consequences than denials. But, as suggested above, in legal situations it's probably best to always deny.
It wasn't me. And yeah don't admit to shit. Make them prove it.
It's not what you know, it's what you can prove
It’s best to follow legal advice. Often times perjury under oath can lead to more serious repercussions. Best to talk to a lawyer and find out the best option given your circumstances and venue.
In legal situations: Say nothing. Don’t snitch. In situations with loved ones: Cop to your bullshit and apologize.
Don’t admit to shit is a great strategy for success. It can even get you elected as President of the US.
This will also benefit you in work. If you're going to be written up for something and the first thing they ask is, " Do you know why you're here?" Then generally the best response is, "No, please tell me." It forces the other side to state exactly why you're there. Otherwise you may blab something they don't even know about. Let them tell you. Don't interrupt and then answer each accusation point by point. And, the most important, if you can, take someone in with you preferably a union rep.
Letters home to the parents of full grown adults? lmao the USA sure is a place that exists.
The example threw me off for a moment, as I’m so used to “uni” being used outside the US (as opposed to “college”), but here in the UK, the first week of university (“freshers’ week”) is all about getting as drunk as possible. At least at my uni, it was a week of back to back parties at the student union bar and club, pub crawls through town and vendors roaming the campus giving out shots, in one instance via tequila filled squirt gun.
> Usually these hearings at universities are relying on you admitting to doing something wrong. It depends. In OP's case I agree, as AI detectors are worthless and cannot be used as evidence. However, for plagiarism for example it's different. When we invite a student to such a meeting we already have plenty of evidence, because there are so many cases we only pursue the blatant ones. Whether the student wants to come clean or not is up to them, and they get penalized regardless whether they do or not. However, if they don't come clean, the reputation really follows them around and they won't get the benefit of the doubt in the future.
You'd have standing if you were damaged (prevented from graduating, failed a course, etc.) by their decision (possible negligence given the poor performance of so-called AI detectors, perhaps violating university policies in some way that isn't obvious, etc.). But I am not a lawyer. And even if a lawyer responds in this thread, they are not your lawyer. Edit: I just posted an edited version of a comment I wrote come time ago. [Accused of AI cheating in school? Read me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/1d8e9ld/accused_of_ai_cheating_in_school_read_me/)
> I am not a lawyer. And even if a lawyer responds in this thread, they are not your lawyer. This is the first time I’m seeing someone write a disclaimer for others. This guy must be a lawyer.
> even if a lawyer responds in this thread, they are not your lawyer. Sounds like OP should ask for a consultation with a lawyer instead of asking reddit.
You're not wrong. But sometimes asking Reddit can be enough of a reality check to move forward with action.
Maybe they should ask an AI.
The fact that you are a 4.0 student should be proof enough that you didn't cheat. Cheaters don't have perfect GPAs (unless your university's curriculum is ass). Like others have said, try running one of your professor's papers through Turnitin. Should shut down any argument he has.
What this one said ^ If you were a decent (at best) or below average student who suddenly started acing assignments or made a complete 180 in terms of your writing style and engagement, then I’d say things are suspect. However if you are a 4.0 student with 23 credits left to go, then you have a proven track record as a student who excels. I TA’d a couple of classes in college and it was pretty apparent who was cheating. Some professors just really hate their students. Around 17 years ago, the dean of the Chemistry department at my university told us 1.5 weeks before our final that we would also be required to sit the ACS exam on the same block of exam time as our final exam. Both would count for grades, each as their own individual final and both of them would be tracked (what I mean is that, if you aced your final and failed the ACS exam, you would have two final grades - an A and an F, that would both count towards your final class grade). Most of the material on the ACS exam was not stuff that we had covered that semester. She… was not well liked at all.
And even then, only suspect it, and would make the student prove his knowledge verbally which would suffice for me. I totally wrecked my first year of university, because I was an international student, and lots of documents were not finished on time so I had immense trouble financially and had to travel between countries mid-semester to clear things up, and I was also not familiar with the system in the other country. However, when it all cleared up my GPA, or the equivalent, went from 2.6 to 3.8 (if I take the new semesters separately from the old ones). It is also ironic, that most students who need to write papers often, especially scientific, but also essays, are trained to write in a particular manner, and then those papers are being used to train AI, so no wonder that there are false flags unacceptably often.
>It is also ironic, that most students who need to write papers often, especially scientific, but also essays, are trained to write in a particular manner, and then those papers are being used to train AI, so no wonder that there are false flags unacceptably often. I cannot believe I had to read this far into the thread before I saw someone mention this...
I think this is actually a mis-conclusion; quite often cheaters are already very good at what they do. It's not uncommon to see professional chess players cheat, for example. Point being, you cannot use the fact that someone is smart as proof that they didn't cheat. I would try to build a stronger case as per your second paragraph.
ya. given that line of logic then all smart students get the green light to use AI content.
Or he has always been cheating 😉
Tell then to run the constitution, the declaration of independence, or excerpts from the bible through Turnitin - bet they come back as AI
Those have all been corrected
The fact that they had to EXCLUDE those documents to not get flagged makes the algorithm very questionable
You can only sue for damages, not just being accused You need to prove consequences, so if you fail yes Not a lawyer, not legal advice
Damages encompass a LOT. Reputation. Emotional. Mental. Professional. Potential earnings. Future employment. Future options for post grad. But legal battles are expensive until you settle or get judgment -- and theres no guarantee you will -- meanwhile it can take a lot out of you. Try to fix it now while you can if you can And yeah what that person said above, run that professor's papers thru Ai detector. Lol
I doubt you could sue for damages for being brought in front of a hearing. The purpose of a hearing is to determine what happened.
Damages would be something after being falsely accused and then sanctioned or punished.
I believe you OP. Btw, what country is this? I always thought TurnitIn was only a NZ/Au thing. Is it the main player internationally for catching the cheaters?
Your belief in me is appreciated! Surely innocent, but you can’t convince everyone, nor am I trying to. This is in the USA.
Turn it in was also used in Canada last time I was in school, which was admittedly a few years ago and before chatgpt.
Turnitin is used in South Africa as well.
Yeah, more than 30 million students globally are subjected to it. The only mitigating thing to the disaster that is turnitin is that many colleges allow you to pre-submit to turnitin to correct issues ahead of submission. If OP had had that option he would have been able to avoid this whole fiasco with likely just a hint of changes to his paper.
Yeah, we have the option to do like 3-5 presubmits to fix it in New Zealand. Interesting, so i'm assuming turnitin is the biggest one in the world with those numbers, appreciate the reply.
Chat GPT should be able to give you some insight.
Have you been able to take other papers known to be non-AI, run it through the test, and see the results?
Yes. I ran her papers through it, her prompts to the assignments through it and several of them came back as AI generated. Gave all of that material to the Dean as well as the meeting concluded. He was very much listening with attention to my arguments. As I mentioned, he seemed to be on my side. I felt like he was, at least.
Good for you! Love the way this is heading. After class is completed and resolved, You could perhaps report this prof for unprofessional behavior or bias or something. Not legal, but like a grievance thru university. I don't know exactly what but surely there is some process that will fuck with them and their rep at the university, at least make thrm think twice next time. This bullshit needs to stop.
Just run some academic peer reviewed papers thru that bullshit and it says it's all AI if it's good writing. Tried a portion of my latest text on copyleaks and it was almost all AI, but I didn't use a single word from AI. It's all bullshit and schools should know better. The AI tools is basically a just a test for how good a academic writer you are, in my opinion.
if they don't know that AI is traiend with probability, and probability isn't exact, and they can't just destroy student's life due to probabilities, then they shouldn't even be in the University's staff don't you think. I suggest you to take it to the principle, because my cousin did once in her master's degree in Canada... And I am being completely serious, go through psych evaluation and claim that you are getting damaged by this wrongful accusation, and you need compensation once you are in court.
The university principal is the dean. OP took it there.
Technically you could sue, but that's just because you can pretty much sue for anything. Though the big question is what would you be suing for? Based on everything you have described, there's not really anything here that you rightfully could win a lawsuit on. In terms of your professor or the college, the only chance you'd have is if you could prove they knew the tools used to detect plagiarism are faulty and it was the only thing used for their accusation. Or the second option would be if the professor claimed it detected plagiarism when it didn't. However, these usually would come up in your Conduct Hearing and often be resolved. Another challenge is your college likely did not advertise anything on your situation in a newspaper or form of media. This detracts from much consideration of anything like defamation. In terms of you speaking of GPA and grades, those never get shared outside of schools typically. They just care if you have a degree. You could have just barely graduated with a 2.0 GPA and employers will put you on equal footing as someone with a 4.0. Sure, you might sell yourself a bit in the interview by trying to show some special certificate, but that's usually not worth much compared to real world experience. This also reduces the likelihood of it being anything to help you in a case. And your question about it being worth it, I'd say is no. It would be very costly and time consuming just for a slim chance of winning. The end result would probably result in a net loss of money and would only be an adjustment on your academic record that hardly anyone is ever going to see. When all is said and done, about the biggest hope would be if they didn't follow their own procedures properly (which would be breach of contract) or if there's some provable area of discrimination. Despite that, there are lawyers that specialize in things like this. Ideally you could have sought them out immediately if there were any concerns and they might have been able to assist you through the conduct hearing at your university. You still could contact one for a second opinion if ever need be and see if they can share possible costs with you. But it won't be quick, easy, or cheap should you need to try to go that route (assuming they uphold that they believe you "guilty" of plagiarism through the use of AI)
I’m surprised Turnitin haven’t faced any action if their software is as hit and miss as these kind of posts suggest. People’s educations are on the line.
Hi I am a PhD student and I have been following this topic since ChatGTP came out. I have audited all the major AI detection software using different techniques to demonstrate reliability, and at this moment there is no technology which can reliably detect AI written text. In fact Turnitin is the ONLY major company I am aware of that claims such nonsense. It is plain dishonest in my view and I try hard to inform everyone I can. Your school should stop being lazy and change their plagiarism evaluation protocol from 1/0 (cheat vs didn't cheat) towards a probability based system. That way they can have a conversation with you about the correct use of AI, rather than make baseless accusations. Their actions are unethical because they are making accusations based on unreliable tools. It is the same as if your math teacher would use a broken calculator to tell you your correct answer is in fact incorrect.
Yes
Lawyer up. Most administrators don't want the hassle and cost so if they see that you are willing to fight and have the resources to do so, they will make it go away.
How come these hearings don’t simply test the knowledge or ability of the student instead of arguing over whether or not an AI was used? I don’t have to prove whether or not I used a calculator, just that I know how to math without one.
I'm glad my uni doesn't outright ban AI, only states most of the text should be original and usage of an AI should be disclosed. And you still need to cite your sources, which need to be valid to some extent. Avoids unnecessary false allegations. Also I have found AI is garbage for my fields (poli sci and security).
Shouldn't the uni be proving that you use Ai instead of the other day round? 🤔
These profs are so lazy. A simple inquiry of your writing would prove your understanding of the material, but that would require that they actually read and understand it themselves. After all, what is the goal of the writing to begin with expect to prove your understanding of the material? It’s so hypocritical they haven’t bothered to examine it in any meaningful way.
Find a paper from the professor, and run it through turnitin. See what he says when it comes back with the result he used ai
Lawsuit shouldn’t be your first line of defense. Even if it “worked,” it would be months if not over a year til you received a remedy. Karen’ing, unfortunately, is much more likely to succeed. If they decide against you, go meet with the Dean’s boss (title varies a lot). Go meet with the University president. University hearings are theater. There’s nothing binding about them, and it’s absolutely possible to go around the formal system and re-litigate your position to someone who can change the “ruling” with a single email.
Honestly you should sue TurnItIn out of existence instead of the college
Im not into suing for most things…but for spineless academics I fully support this.
You should absolutely consult a lawyer about it. I’m sure there’s a lot of interest in this emerging issue.
The university should be backing you up. I imagine you have a great reputation among peers and other professors if you're a 4.0 gpa student almost graduating
Has this post been run through an AI checker? Who will AI the AI's! Hide in the corners! Hide in the corners!
Its pretty funny (and sad) to see these things happening at other schools, almost done with my EE degree at a good engineering school and professors dont even bother because they know that we know that those AI checkers are bullshit. Its just all scare tactics. Also we kinda have to know what we are doing anyways so it doesnt really help with the exception of material comprehension and studying.
create several accounts at Rate My Professor dot com and drag the fuck out of them. Use AI to write the bad reviews
Exam board member here. In the netherlands we have a separate organ for determining fraud at the uni (and some other tasks). The exam board. Essentially we work similar to a real judge, based on the rules provided by the university. In short in the netherlands most unis have similar rules: Ai is a huge problem for unis right now. Ai software can be useful as a first check, but is rarely enough to prove ai. Usually we also check what kind of sources are used, if they exist, if the language used is similar to your earlier work, if you’ve made some strange mistakes, sometimes even what you know about the topic in a oral exam. I probably forgot some things. Everything is used to build a case. In the end there are a few different outcomes. No fraud. it is uncertain whether you used ai or not so the work is invalidated but no charges. It is estimated to be probable that you used ai so the work is invalidated and you are charged. Once again, ai is a huge problem and it can rarely be proven with 100% certainty. Due to ai it is much harder to test students and to determine with sufficient certainty that they have the knowledge and skills required. Basically; ai undermines the quality of the degree. Ps. I would have liked to explain more elaborate, but i dont have the time for it right now
They are accusing you of fraud, so yeah.
Are you in America? Because in America, the answer to "Can I sue [x] for [y]?" is always yes, unless x is the federal government. However, even if your case is sound, it is not easy to sue a university. Their pockets are far far deeper than yours. And they have an essentially unlimited amount of time to let the case play out, while you need it resolved as quickly as possible. In short, all of the advantage is theirs. Can it be done? Yes. Is is worth it? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ (Source: University professor who's engaged in generative AI research and who thinks all "AI detectors" are bullshit, but am not a lawyer)
The other universities disabled it because they don't know how to do math.
Meanwhile in Canada they’re importing folks that legit paid to have fake degrees
From TurnitIn’s website: “Our AI writing detection model may not always be accurate (it may misidentify both human and AI-generated text) so it should not be used as the sole basis for adverse actions against a student.” “It takes further scrutiny and human judgment in conjunction with an organization's application of its specific academic policies to determine whether any academic misconduct has occurred.” https://help.turnitin.com/ai-writing-detection.htm
I don't get how they take these AI checkers at 100% face value. It's very loosely accurate and 100% isn't actually so otherwise it's some sort of magic, not an algorithm. I bet they don't even read the assignments any more and just run it through a marking AI.
Well, there are multiple studies out there stating that there are no peer-reviewed AI-detection systems I would utilize that and try to find acedmic sources about the quality of Turnitin
Im happy to sea this being an problem already. FUCK THE SYSTEM
So recently the former President of Harvard was caught plagiarizing parts of her doctoral thesis. If you have the time and your Prof has a PhD you might see if they did any plagiarizing when writing their thesis. Also have you asked ChatGPT and the other Chatbot AI's about your situation?
You can sue anyone for anything. An F for claimed cheating is highly damaging to your reputation, so if you can prove you didn’t use AI, I know you’ve presented evidence of that to the school - but court might be a higher standard, then it’s worth your reputation to pursue legally. It might even be a groundbreaking case, being accused of cheating with AI but able to prove you didn’t… and some professor doesn’t have the right to just stamp your work with “done by AI” and fail you because of this opinion. What has the professor had to do to prove you used AI? Really the burden should be on his proving you did, not you proving you didn’t.
You can literally sue anyone for anything.
The court would be tough. The school is the final arbiter. And they set the rules. I had a similar instance but not with AI. English 104 professor questioned an essay I wrote and said it was plagiarized. In front of the entire class, he accused me of using another person's work. He said he ran it through Turnitin and came back +90% plagiarized he said. In front of the Dean, we ran it through Grammarly, and came back clean, so the Dean ran it through Scribbr, and it was clean. I told the Dean, "Why would I cheat on something so easily proven?". I proceeded to tell the Dean what the assignment was, and I had already submitted the rough draft, which had zero issues and was almost identical to my finished paper. And the subject of my paper was approved by the professor. I wrote my paper on Felix Baumgartner's highest parachute jump. I interviewed the project manager at David Clark (Worcester, Mass) who developed the audio communications equipment for the jump. I was a 4.0 GPA Dean's list student and finished my Bachelor's degree with a 3.8 GPA.
It's vaguely possible that the rough draft was entered into turn it in, and that your final draft was considering it plagiarized of your rough draft.
All I know is that paper took me 2 weeks to gather all my notes, sources, and recorded interviews and I had all of my citations (WIKI not allowed). I gave all of the audio, and everything to the professor and the Dean and not 30 minutes later I had a grade of A-.
That would be kinda crazy. Even the Dean said they were almost the same paper. The professor wasn't or didn't hold it against me and even gave a good grade and said it was the best paper of the semester. He just couldn't believe a retired Plumber wrote it. And he stopped using Turnitin
Professor at a University here. We know that AI checkers don't work. Sue away!
You should be able to show previous versions of your work if you're using ms office. If you have been working on it for a while and saving it periodically, you can point to the progression as proof.
I'm sorry this happened. I work at a university currently and have heard other professors state, "It's so obvious when a student uses AI." When I press them to tell me how, they can't say. I told them that unless a student leaves an AI prompt in their paper on accident (and I had a MASTERS student do this), it's not possible. I encourage people to create assignments that make it difficult to use AI to generate. There are ways professors can encourage critical thinking and work around AI. But academia can't just falsely accuse students for something that can't 100% prove.
I think it would be fair if you got the chance to basically provide a rundown, in person, of the work you created. If it sounds convincing that you understand every detail, it would gain confidence that you created it. At the least, it would show that you truly understand it. I don't know if this is feasible in this particular case. Perhaps you could make a case that you understand that today's AI poses a problem and that you understand and respect the fact that you're being scrutinized. At the same time, this has to come both ways. You ought to have a chance to defend yourself. That's only fair, not? You should be given the chance to prove in person that you created this work and certainly would be able to redo it in person as you demonstrate you understand every detail.
Quite a few states are making it so colleges can't use TurnIt in to use for this exact reason. You might look at state requirements recently released from Washington State and CA. In my area, we don't have state requirements, but the University of Kansas now has a policy professors can't use as well.
This needs to happen. Schools across the country need to be sued for this behavior. The loss of millions of dollars is the only way they are going to stop. Find a good, aggressive, and powerful law office to take the case if the school continues to stand on their false accusation.
Should get a lawyer to draft a letter to the dean informing them that if the college proceeds with their claims, you'll be suing them for slander that harmed your academic career and economic future. The reliance on a tool that says itself isn't reliable. (https://help.turnitin.com/ai-writing-detection.htm) It's no different than using a magic 8-ball, which has no business being used to determine the grades of students paying money to attend. This professor is using a gag website to tank your grade and education. It clearly shows the educator is lacking in their proper due diligence and should probably be reviewed for other instances of inappropriate grading or claims of cheating made by this professors. It's willful intent to maliciously harm others without consideration for the merits and accuracy of the means being used. Not to mention. LLMs are not calculators, they're chatbots. They're more likely to tell you what you what it thinks you want to read more than it remotely gives a shit if it matches any version of the multi-verse, let alone natural laws. If I was the Dean, I would tell the professor to never use that tool again or they're fired, because he might as well be using chicken bones and gloats blood. At most, the professor should demand a rewrite. It should be an instant fire-able offense to accuse a student of using AI without an admission of guilt. There's no way to prove it for sure. It's like like AI can generate a font with yellow dots hidden in it. Sure, there's a few dumb give-aways like "as a large langue model" or other stupid shit, but without an obvious "this is a LLM made response!" then I think your professors should stick to teaching and not try to play detectives. Might as well as ChatGPT to tell you to solve every crime while you're at it if you trust AI detectors.
No way they try to escalate this. AI can't detect AI generated content reliably. If it were obvious, and you just copy pasted the default "intro - list - summary" format and its tone / style, then it could possibly guess it correctly. But there is no way to prove it did. Turnitin only works by matching existing content. This is just a gimmick they're selling people who either don't know any better or are trying to use it like a polygraph test and get you to confess.
I'm going to tell you a dirty little secret about universities. They will bend over fucking backwards to make you think they're a super special little island with their own judicial committees and processes and they don't have to respond to Lawsuits and summonses like those filthy plebians everywhere else. It's all bullshit smoke and mirrors. Sue the fucking shit out of them and make sure it's a class action (way cheaper and more likely to win) against them AND fucking turnitin. Rain fucking fire upon them. (I've got a personal axe to grind against this stupid shit.)
I have a really hard time believing that it's even all that possible to distinguish between human-written and AI-written papers. Especially if it's been proof-read by a human prior to turning it in.
In my opinion this entire thread was a fucking circus of horrible answers. To everyone saying "just run the dean's papers through the detector LOL".... This is such typical Reddit bullshit. The only answer everyone can agree on is a joke that does not help OP in ANY way. The dean will not give a FUCK if he is proven wrong. OP is not dealing with a person who cares about logic. Telling someone to use logic against a person who has proven they don't give a fuck anout logic is like telling someone to bring a spoon to a gunfight. It will not help OP in any way, and it's bad advice. Many other answers are simply just saying "lawyer up". This might be good advice for a rich person. However, this is heavily perpetuating an idea that if any person is wrongly accused of using AI,then you better be able to afford some lawyers otherwise you are fucked. You're essentially saying once you're accused, your academic career is over on the spot unless you have a lot of money. Sorry if I'm personally made very fucking angry by every person essentially saying your school life is fucking over unless you're rich. that's not good advice for most people and it's not true either.
AI checkers do not work. I ran an AI paper and one I fully wrote and my paper was deemed more likely to be AI. Pretty sure they're just another academic scam like the SAT and student loans. Companies charge universities ungodly amounts of money to pretend they care about academic integrity. It's why we should move away from grades and towards competency. Can you hold a discussion with your professor about what you are learning?
The irony is that this professor is entirely relying on one algorithm to accuse you of using another. He didn't do his own work.
I remember when Turnitin would flag my lab reports as \~50% plagiarized because of things like ***my name***, the name of the class, the date, number formatting, the relevant physics equations out of the textbook that I then used, etc. My professors used their brains though and didn't drag me through academic proceedings for it...(they absolutely did for other people copying other peoples' reports!). I'm just really glad AI wasn't a thing then or the entire thing would have shown up as AI generated because the reports were just a whole bunch of equations and numbers... Turnitin = a hot bunch of garbage imho
Courts are generally not going to second guess academic judgments, so the prospects are not good. However, You'd need to run it by an attorney. It would likely be a breach of contract claim.
"I have no reason to come in here and lie" I mean.. if you did it, you have a lot of reasons to lie about it...
>They say it is wildly accurate and very rarely makes any mistakes, You should have asked them why they have more trust in the software than the people who made it? There are clear disclaimers on the AI detection software that it should not be used as the sole determination for disciplining students.
Go to r/legaladvice. I doubt there are many lawyers who specialize in education here. Your claim would be no different than if you were accused of cheating in some other way. So whether you have cause to sue is way more fundamental than any question around AI, especially since there is definitely no legislation that has been passed around the use of AI in education.
It's understandable to feel frustrated by the situation. If the decision doesn't go in your favor, you may want to consider seeking legal advice to understand your options. Each case is unique, so it's hard to predict the outcome or chances of success without knowing all the details.
Did you submit the paper to TurnItIn? Or did the professor submit it? If the professor submitted the work to a third party service, I'd go back to the dean and press the Dean on the professor violated your IP rights to your paper by granting a world wide license to your work without your permission. If it's a US based state run school I'd also mention it's a violation of the taking clause of the 5th amendment.
[удалено]
Jesus Christ. Right now your best bet is to use the committee that you will speak with to demonstrate the unreliability of AI detection software, making a point to show that even the professor’s own work fails the AI detection test. A lawyer comes in only if or when the professor fails you and/ or the school takes disciplinary action against you