‘But there is a difference between recognising AI use and proving its use. So I tried an experiment. … I received 122 paper submissions. Of those, the Trojan horse easily identified 33 AI-generated papers. I sent these stats to all the students and gave them the opportunity to admit to using AI before they were locked into failing the class. Another 14 outed themselves. In other words, nearly 39% of the submissions were at least partially written by AI.‘

Article archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20251125225915/https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/set-trap-to-catch-students-cheating-ai_uk_691f20d1e4b00ed8a94f4c01

  • finitebanjo@piefed.worldEnglish
    393·
    14 days ago

    This method is now increasingly known (there’s even an episode of “The Simpsons” about it) and likely has already run its course as a plausible method for saving oneself from reading and grading AI slop. To be brief, I inserted hidden text into an assignment’s directions that the students couldn’t see but that ChatGPT can.

    I received several emails and spoke with a few students who came to my office and were genuinely apologetic. I had a few that tried to fight me on the accusations, too, assuming I flagged them as AI for “well written sentences”. But the Trojan horse did not lie.

    lmfao, I hope he failed those kids anyways.

    • trashcan@sh.itjust.works
      591·
      14 days ago

      […] Let me tell you why the Trojan horse worked. It is because students do not know what they do not know. My hidden text asked them to write the paper “from a Marxist perspective”. Since the events in the book had little to do with the later development of Marxism, I thought the resulting essay might raise a red flag with students, but it didn’t.

      But did he consider some may just be Lemmy users?

      • finitebanjo@piefed.worldEnglish
        212·
        14 days ago

        Ah, but then the bibliography and recommended reading sections of the paper would have cleared that up. Fucking tankies love recommending “you should read more theory, comrade.” Also, why would paid troll farms in ethiopia be taking classes in person?

        • GlitchyDigiBun@lemmy.worldEnglish
          152·
          14 days ago

          Oh my god, you’re right. The number of .ml users that “learned their theory from someone else” instead of reading source texts is mind-boggling. To be fair, I don’t want to read 150yo texts to inform my own opinions, but moreso because I find them archaic in their reasoning, not because they’re dull and pompous (they are).

          • Randomgal@lemmy.ca
            91·
            14 days ago

            If you “learned your theory form someone else” you’re somebody’s goon, not a maxist.

            • Taldan@lemmy.world
              1·
              13 days ago

              Nearly every human on earth would be in that category. The whole basis of human knowledge is that we take the knowledge of others and build upon it

      • krashmo@lemmy.world
        18·
        14 days ago

        We are anarchists with Leninist tendencies, not Marxists, you imperial dog.

        Is joke, I barely know any of these words.

      • saltesc@lemmy.world
        8·
        14 days ago

        when ChatGPT read the prompt, it even directly asked if it should include Marxism, and they all said yes. As one student said to me, “I thought it sounded smart.”

        Yes.

      • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
        6·
        14 days ago

        In that case, I think the student could easily prove their authenticity. Invite the student in and ask them to explain their understanding of and perspectives on several conflicting flavors of Marxism. Compare and contrast Leninism and Maoism. Or find other ways for them to demonstrate some understanding of Marxism. If the student really is just such a big Marx fan that they shoehorn the topic into every paper they can, it is reasonable to expect they have at least some surface-level understanding of Marxism, or at least to the level that would be necessary to write the paper they submitted.