GenAI Detection Tools, Adversarial Techniques and Implications for Inclusivity in Higher Education

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2403.19148v1
• Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2024 04:57:13 GMT
• Title: GenAI Detection Tools, Adversarial Techniques and Implications for Inclusivity in Higher Education
• Authors: Mike Perkins, Jasper Roe, Binh H. Vu, Darius Postma, Don Hickerson, James McGaughran, Huy Q. Khuat,
• Abstract summary: This study investigates the efficacy of six major Generative AI (GenAI) text detectors when confronted with machine-generated content that has been modified. The results demonstrate that the detectors' already low accuracy rates (39.5%) show major reductions in accuracy (17.4%) when faced with manipulated content. The accuracy limitations and the potential for false accusations demonstrate that these tools cannot currently be recommended for determining whether violations of academic integrity have occurred.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: This study investigates the efficacy of six major Generative AI (GenAI) text detectors when confronted with machine-generated content that has been modified using techniques designed to evade detection by these tools (n=805). The results demonstrate that the detectors' already low accuracy rates (39.5%) show major reductions in accuracy (17.4%) when faced with manipulated content, with some techniques proving more effective than others in evading detection. The accuracy limitations and the potential for false accusations demonstrate that these tools cannot currently be recommended for determining whether violations of academic integrity have occurred, underscoring the challenges educators face in maintaining inclusive and fair assessment practices. However, they may have a role in supporting student learning and maintaining academic integrity when used in a non-punitive manner. These results underscore the need for a combined approach to addressing the challenges posed by GenAI in academia to promote the responsible and equitable use of these emerging technologies. The study concludes that the current limitations of AI text detectors require a critical approach for any possible implementation in HE and highlight possible alternatives to AI assessment strategies.

Related papers

• Self-consistent Validation for Machine Learning Electronic Structure [81.54661501506185]
  Method integrates machine learning with self-consistent field methods to achieve both low validation cost and interpret-ability. This, in turn, enables exploration of the model's ability with active learning and instills confidence in its integration into real-world studies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-15T18:41:35Z)
• Hidding the Ghostwriters: An Adversarial Evaluation of AI-Generated Student Essay Detection [29.433764586753956]
  Large language models (LLMs) have exhibited remarkable capabilities in text generation tasks. The utilization of these models carries inherent risks, including but not limited to plagiarism, the dissemination of fake news, and issues in educational exercises. This paper aims to bridge this gap by constructing AIG-ASAP, an AI-generated student essay dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-01T08:11:56Z)
• Assaying on the Robustness of Zero-Shot Machine-Generated Text Detectors [57.7003399760813]
  We explore advanced Large Language Models (LLMs) and their specialized variants, contributing to this field in several ways. We uncover a significant correlation between topics and detection performance. These investigations shed light on the adaptability and robustness of these detection methods across diverse topics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-20T10:53:53Z)
• Contra generative AI detection in higher education assessments [0.0]
  The rapid advancement and widespread adoption of generative AI, particularly in education, necessitates a reevaluation of traditional academic integrity mechanisms. We explore the effectiveness, vulnerabilities, and ethical implications of AI detection tools in the context of preserving academic integrity. This paper advocates for a strategic shift towards robust assessment methods and educational policies that embrace generative AI usage.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-08T18:46:44Z)
• Student Mastery or AI Deception? Analyzing ChatGPT's Assessment Proficiency and Evaluating Detection Strategies [1.633179643849375]
  Generative AI systems such as ChatGPT have a disruptive effect on learning and assessment. This work investigates the performance of ChatGPT by evaluating it across three courses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-27T20:10:13Z)
• Testing of Detection Tools for AI-Generated Text [0.0]
  The paper examines the functionality of detection tools for artificial intelligence generated text. It evaluates them based on accuracy and error type analysis. The research covers 12 publicly available tools and two commercial systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-21T16:29:44Z)
• From Static Benchmarks to Adaptive Testing: Psychometrics in AI Evaluation [60.14902811624433]
  We discuss a paradigm shift from static evaluation methods to adaptive testing. This involves estimating the characteristics and value of each test item in the benchmark and dynamically adjusting items in real-time. We analyze the current approaches, advantages, and underlying reasons for adopting psychometrics in AI evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-18T09:54:33Z)
• Game of Tones: Faculty detection of GPT-4 generated content in university assessments [0.0]
  This study explores the robustness of university assessments against the use of Open AI's Gene-Trained Transformer. It evaluates the ability of academic staff to detect its use when supported by Artificial Intelligence (AI) detection tool.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-29T13:31:58Z)
• The Role of AI in Drug Discovery: Challenges, Opportunities, and Strategies [97.5153823429076]
  The benefits, challenges and drawbacks of AI in this field are reviewed. The use of data augmentation, explainable AI, and the integration of AI with traditional experimental methods are also discussed.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-08T23:23:39Z)
• Towards Reducing Labeling Cost in Deep Object Detection [61.010693873330446]
  We propose a unified framework for active learning, that considers both the uncertainty and the robustness of the detector. Our method is able to pseudo-label the very confident predictions, suppressing a potential distribution drift.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-22T16:53:09Z)
• Counterfactual Explanations as Interventions in Latent Space [62.997667081978825]
  Counterfactual explanations aim to provide to end users a set of features that need to be changed in order to achieve a desired outcome. Current approaches rarely take into account the feasibility of actions needed to achieve the proposed explanations. We present Counterfactual Explanations as Interventions in Latent Space (CEILS), a methodology to generate counterfactual explanations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-14T20:48:48Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.