224
Professor denounces mass AI fraud on an exam at Brown University: ‘Academic integrity is at risk’ (english.elpais.com)
submitted 3 months ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
21 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 10 points 3 months ago (3 children)

I've grappled with this before, and even before people were using AI, take home exams were always open-book by default because of course people will look things up. The irony is, since AI, I've had a lot worse essay submissions-- they simply get shit wrong a lot more relying on AI (especially in my statistics class).

And my stats class only needs to do basic stuff to show work; I let them use excel/sheets to check work. They can't even type in "=correl()" properly and would rather take a photo of the data and send it to ChatGPT. AI gives them wildly wrong steps and it's so obviously wrong...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Funny: I'm a doctoral student in a statistical program and I have thought, since I started, that you can't really use AI to cheat at stats. They can't even get the math right much of the time. I wouldn't even want to imagine what an essay would look like.

    ChatGPT is good for ensuring that you understand a concept or, perhaps, help setting up a table or a specific formula. Not so good at actually doing STAT homework, though. (Note: I've never tried to cheat, but have seen how bad some of the responses are.)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    I've seen it used very occasionally as a study tool, which is generally fine until it gets it wrong. Just like you can use Khan Academy (or I guess, YouTube but there's again a chance it's wrong lol). The craziest is when they use an AI delusional statistical theory that doesn't exist, lol.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago*

    So, as you can see, the Reverse Bayesian Transformation has resulted in a normalized distribution. While n = 3, this logistic regression clearly provides a value of 0.75. Therefore, we conclude that there is a statistically significant relationship between cat owners and people who never pay taxes.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent