Inicio
todoELE
  • Inicio
  • Materiales
    • πŸ“‹ Actividades
    • πŸ“ Conjugación
    • πŸ“Š Corpus
    • πŸ“” Diccionarios
    • βœ… Evaluación
    • βš™οΈ Gramática
    • πŸ“— Manuales
    • ✍️ Ortografía
    • πŸ“… Programación
    • πŸ—£οΈ Pronunciación
    • πŸ“ Recursos
    • πŸ”€ Vocabulario
    • πŸ’» Herramientas digitales
  • Formación
    • πŸ“š Bibliografía
    • πŸ‘₯ Congresos
    • πŸŽ“ Cursos
    • 🏫 Centros
    • 🏒 Organizaciones
    • πŸ“° Revistas
    • 🌍 Atlas de ELE
  • Trabajo
    • πŸ’Ό Ofertas de trabajo
    • ℹ️ Trabajo - Recursos
  • En la red
    • 🌐 Sitios ELE
    • πŸ“° Agregador
    • πŸ“§ Formespa
  • IA
    • ✨ Nuevos contenidos
    • πŸ“š Bibliografía IA
    • 🧰 Herramientas IA
    • πŸ’¬ Prompts
    • πŸ§ͺ Experiencias IA
    • 🌐 Sitios web IA
    • πŸ“° Actualidad IA
  • Comunidad
    • πŸ“° Actualidad ELE
    • 😊 Anécdotas ELE
    • πŸ“ Blog
    • πŸ“ŒTablón de anuncios
  • Buscar

Ruta de navegación

  • Inicio
  • Bibliografia
  • Testing of detection tools for AI-generated text

Sección IA: Inteligencia artificial Bibliografía

Testing of detection tools for AI-generated text

Debora Weber-Wulff
Alla Anohina-Naumeca
Sonja Bjelobaba
Tomáš Foltýnek
Jean Guerrero-Dib
Olumide Popoola
Petr Šigut
Lorna Waddington
2023
International Journal for Educational Integrity
19
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-023-0014…
artículo
estudio experimental
estudio empírico
inteligencia artificial
integridad académica
evaluación
traducción automática
traducción
IA y evaluación
análisis de producción de IA
estudio empírico

Texto completo

Recent advances in generative pre-trained transformer large language models have emphasised the potential risks of unfair use of artificial intelligence (AI) generated content in an academic environment and intensified efforts in searching for solutions to detect such content. The paper examines the general functionality of detection tools for AI-generated text and evaluates them based on accuracy and error type analysis. Specifically, the study seeks to answer research questions about whether existing detection tools can reliably differentiate between human-written text and ChatGPT-generated text, and whether machine translation and content obfuscation techniques affect the detection of AI-generated text. The research covers 12 publicly available tools and two commercial systems (Turnitin and PlagiarismCheck) that are widely used in the academic setting. The researchers conclude that the available detection tools are neither accurate nor reliable and have a main bias towards classifying the output as human-written rather than detecting AI-generated text. Furthermore, content obfuscation techniques significantly worsen the performance of tools. The study makes several significant contributions. First, it summarises up-to-date similar scientific and non-scientific efforts in the field. Second, it presents the result of one of the most comprehensive tests conducted so far, based on a rigorous research methodology, an original document set, and a broad coverage of tools. Third, it discusses the implications and drawbacks of using detection tools for AI-generated text in academic settings.

Artículo 26. Texto completo en abierto (CC BY 4.0).

  • Inicie sesión para enviar comentarios

Enviar publicación

Contenidos relacionados

  • GenAI detection tools, adversarial techniques and implications for inclusivity in higher education
  • GPT detectors are biased against non-native English writers
  • Accused: How students respond to allegations of using ChatGPT on assessments
  • The AI Assessment Scale (AIAS) in action: A pilot implementation of GenAI-supported assessment
  • GPT-3.5 para la nivelación de ELE en un entorno universitario: Un estudio comparativo de zero-shot learning y fine-tuning
  • Can ChatGPT score ESL writing? A correlation analysis between teacher and GenAI scores
Sobre Todoele Índice Publica Contacto: todoele@gmail.com
Política de privacidad Créditos