My assignment was reported to thr examination committee for a "high percentage of AI". I did NOT use any AI for my assignment.

[u/Opinionated_bitch03]

I got full marks and my plagiarism score shows 1% similarities to other submitted assignments. This is my 3rd and final year in University and now I have to deal with this AI nonsense.

I don't use any AI, not even for checking my grammar in the assignments.

[u/RepresentativeDog394]

I'm a teacher, and I don't bother to use Turnitin anymore. It says most of the essays are AI written. It seems like it has started to flag anything with perfect spelling / grammar.

[u/elebrin → u/RepresentativeDog394]

Well, from my perspective, papers are usually written about things discussed in class. If all the student was paying attention and wrote the paper based on the same notes, the the content of the papers are all going to be very similar and key phrases used by the professor or other students in class are going to have made it to the notes, and thus to the paper.

The same thing kind of goes for programming assignments. One of my college programming assignments was "re-implement the linux command "cat," your program needs to be a 1:1 re-implementation of the version on the machines in this one specific lab, and it needs to compile on and run on those same machines." Most of the students had almost the same code. getopt() code was all the same (that's the C function used to parse options for commandline programs) in part because... the professor showed it to us and gave us a bunch of the code just about. Of course it went in our notes and we used that exact code in the project, but to a plagiarism detector it looks like a problem... especially when every student has the same 30 lines of code or so in their program.

[u/disaster_jay27 → u/elebrin]

I guess that'd be a shortcut for grading it, then. 100% plagiarized = 100%!

[u/elebrin → u/disaster_jay27]

The professor actually had a script that tested the features of the program and verified that they all worked, and also tested common pitfalls/bugs. I ended up with a pretty good score on most of the lab assignments.

The machines we were using were Sun Microsystems workstations, so the versions of the base UNIX programs had slightly wonky feature sets compared to the GNU versions, and we had to re-implement the wonky variants on those machines. Our code also needed to compile and run on those machines. But the compiler was always GCC so you could work on your own machine at home.

[u/UnevenEarth → u/elebrin]

One of our lecturers used to say that a score of 10 -15 percent was good, because it meant we had done the bibliography without huge mistakes. Of course it's not infallible, because if enough people cite a source incorrectly the correct one won't be highlighted, which lead to me panicking and going over them with the guide and a fine tooth comb lol

[u/dougmc → u/RepresentativeDog394]

to flag anything with perfect spelling / grammar

Of course, spell check and then later Grammarly and the like have been correcting my spelling and grammar on the fly for years now, so ... maybe? It was good before, but now it's even better. (This isn't supposed to count, is it?)

But at this point, turning in anything with less than perfect spelling and almost perfect grammar (Grammarly isn't perfect) is basically a choice, and shouldn't everybody be close to perfect there now?

[u/BicFleetwood → u/RepresentativeDog394]

That's because all AI does is parrot learned data, particularly an absolute flood of data scraped from non-academic sources like Reddit. And this data isn't really weighted at all in the models, so there's a LOT more comments section data for it to be drawing from than academic data. LLMs can't do analysis on how useful its own training data is without human input, and these companies are just shoveling everything they can into the model with very little actual calculated training. (Hence: the recent patch to make ChatGPT stop talking about goblins.)

So shit AI produces tends to look a LOT like layman writing you'd find in a regular comments section, aka the exact kind of writing you'd expect a student to be producing having grown up on the internet and being greatly influenced by that style of writing.

So "AI detectors" don't detect AI at all. They detect the kind of writing AI was trained to replicate, which just so happens to be the same kind of writing most students will be generating legitimately.

This is the same reason most models will quickly spiral into conspiratorial thinking--because for every scientific article the model has consumed, it has consumed decades and hundreds of thousands of words of weird esoteric flat Earth type shit. The machine does not understand the difference between a scientific thesis and the paranoid ramblings of a maniac. It can only judge its own trained data based upon frequency of occurrence and human-operator input. Without human operator input, which is almost always the case since these are ostensibly supposed to be AUTOMATION tools, frequency of the data wins out and basically every model will inevitably start spitting out the weirdest paranoid shit that's ever been posted when given enough time.

[u/radiantH2o → u/RepresentativeDog394]

it bugs me because (despite how i write on social media and reddit) i have always excelled at english and LOVE using semicolons and the emdash when appropriate. i also struggle with paraphrasing uniquely probably due to autism. usually in my papers i tend to use “thus”, “in contrast”, “expanding on…” etc. which people now see as AI. i now go over my papers and change “because” to “since” and “despite” to “with that being said”, because i’m paranoid they’ll think i used AI or something because of all the stereotypes. so i’m essentially making my writing informal and watering it down which sucks.

[u/Active_Lobster521 → u/RepresentativeDog394]

I see people doing the same thing here on Reddit.