Students are using large language models and AI detectors can often detect their use

Timothy Paustian, Betty Slinger
{"title":"Students are using large language models and AI detectors can often detect their use","authors":"Timothy Paustian, Betty Slinger","doi":"10.3389/feduc.2024.1374889","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Large language model (LLM) artificial intelligence (AI) has been in development for many years. Open AI thrust them into the spotlight in late 2022 when it released ChatGPT to the public. The wide availability of LLMs resulted in various reactions, from jubilance to fear. In academia, the potential for LLM abuse in written assignments was immediately recognized, with some instructors fearing they would have to eliminate this mode of evaluation. In this study, we seek to answer two questions. First, how are students using LLM in their college work? Second, how well do AI detectors function in the detection of AI-generated text? We organized 153 students from an introductory microbiology course to write essays on the regulation of the tryptophan operon. We then asked AI the same question and had the students try to disguise the answer. We also surveyed students about their use of LLMs. The survey found that 46.9% of students use LLM in their college work, but only 11.6% use it more than once a week. Students are unclear about what constitutes unethical use of LLMs. Unethical use of LLMs is a problem, with 39% of students admitting to using LLMs to answer assessments and 7% using them to write entire papers. We also tested their prose against five AI detectors. Overall, AI detectors could differentiate between human and AI-written text, identifying 88% correctly. Given the stakes, having a 12% error rate indicates we cannot rely on AI detectors alone to check LLM use, but they may still have value.","PeriodicalId":508739,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Education","volume":" 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1374889","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Large language model (LLM) artificial intelligence (AI) has been in development for many years. Open AI thrust them into the spotlight in late 2022 when it released ChatGPT to the public. The wide availability of LLMs resulted in various reactions, from jubilance to fear. In academia, the potential for LLM abuse in written assignments was immediately recognized, with some instructors fearing they would have to eliminate this mode of evaluation. In this study, we seek to answer two questions. First, how are students using LLM in their college work? Second, how well do AI detectors function in the detection of AI-generated text? We organized 153 students from an introductory microbiology course to write essays on the regulation of the tryptophan operon. We then asked AI the same question and had the students try to disguise the answer. We also surveyed students about their use of LLMs. The survey found that 46.9% of students use LLM in their college work, but only 11.6% use it more than once a week. Students are unclear about what constitutes unethical use of LLMs. Unethical use of LLMs is a problem, with 39% of students admitting to using LLMs to answer assessments and 7% using them to write entire papers. We also tested their prose against five AI detectors. Overall, AI detectors could differentiate between human and AI-written text, identifying 88% correctly. Given the stakes, having a 12% error rate indicates we cannot rely on AI detectors alone to check LLM use, but they may still have value.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
学生正在使用大型语言模型,而人工智能检测器通常可以检测到这些模型的使用情况
大型语言模型(LLM)人工智能(AI)已发展多年。2022 年底,开放人工智能向公众发布了 ChatGPT,将它们推到了聚光灯下。LLM 的广泛使用导致了各种反应,有欢欣鼓舞,也有恐惧不安。在学术界,人们立即意识到了在书面作业中滥用 LLM 的可能性,一些教师担心他们将不得不取消这种评价模式。在本研究中,我们试图回答两个问题。首先,学生在大学作业中是如何使用 LLM 的?其次,人工智能检测器在检测人工智能生成文本方面的功能如何?我们组织了 153 名微生物学入门课程的学生撰写关于色氨酸操作子调控的论文。然后,我们向人工智能提出了同样的问题,并让学生尝试伪装答案。我们还对学生使用 LLM 的情况进行了调查。调查发现,46.9% 的学生在大学学习中使用 LLM,但只有 11.6% 的学生每周使用一次以上。学生不清楚什么是不道德地使用法律硕士。不道德使用 LLM 是一个问题,39% 的学生承认使用 LLM 回答评估问题,7% 的学生使用 LLM 撰写整篇论文。我们还用五种人工智能检测器测试了他们的散文。总体而言,人工智能检测器能够区分人类和人工智能撰写的文本,识别正确率为 88%。考虑到利害关系,12%的错误率表明我们不能仅仅依靠人工智能检测器来检查LLM的使用情况,但它们可能仍有价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Future skills for Industry 4.0 integration and innovative learning for continuing engineering education Enhancing institutional integration and enjoyment among Saudi female physical education students: exploring the mediation of motivation and psychological needs satisfaction Scientific creativity in secondary students and its relationship with STEM-related attitudes, engagement and work intentions Instructor enthusiasm in online lectures: how vocal enthusiasm impacts student engagement, learning, and memory Flipping the anatomy classroom: a comparative analysis of 16-week and 8-week courses in a community college
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1