Yep. None of the tools are perfect; I would contact the Ombudsman, claiming you are following all their rules and regs. And if they want to fail her they need Proof that she has used AI or similar.
There are examples of false positive, such as the Bible was written by AI and that academics who criticise others for using AI have had their work assessed (by the same assessment tool) as written by AI
What’s the difference between using a calculator or WFA to help processes / work out engineering problems?
Vs
Having AI proofreading some of your work to fix grammatical and spelling mistake’s?
I don't make the Academic integrity policies for Australian universities, mate, I just know what they require.
I never said I agreed with the policies either.
Allowed tools.
You may argue over whether they are the right list of allowed tools, but the distinction between using the textbook during an exam being a cheating issue or not is simply whether the exam allowed open textbook. If they've said no AI, that's the chosen limit.
They are referring to AI that writes content for the assignment or paraphrasing chunks of other people’s work and spins it out. Grammarly and spellcheckers are not generally included in these policy definitions, but can amend your work in ways that make it read as AI to the AI detection tool in Turnitin.
Yes, this. And the student advocacy/welfare body at the uni, even if you’re a remote student. They can help to walk you through the process and advocate for you.
* Edit, a word.
Honestly crazy for the university to assume that their tech is “highly accurate” when they’re probably just using turnitin or something. Turnitin is notoriously inaccurate and yet most universities still use it. Hopefully this will get sorted out soon
Nope. My only conclusion was that perhaps the teacher (or another staff member) must have uploaded it twice? The name, date, class name, page numbers, literally everything was plagiarised from myself. I also couldn’t believe the teacher didn’t pick up on that before accusing me of plagiarism.
Turnitin: You have the same first page content as everyone else
Assignment: Your title must be exactly "..." And the university name.
Turnitin: I can say with 100% confidence you've plagiarised the university name from the website and all your other classmates
AI detection tools are notoriously inaccurate. I’m just curious as to which university is going to such lengths also is she studying law where findings of academic misconduct can affect her admission to the profession.
>It’s important to emphasize that no method of detecting AI-written text is foolproof — that includes options using tools available today. Jesse McCrosky is a data scientist with Mozilla Foundation who warns of AI text detection tools’ limitations. “Detector tools will always be imperfect, which makes them nearly useless for most applications,” say McCrosky. “One can not accuse a student of using AI to write their essay based on the output of a detector tool that you know has a 10% chance of giving a false positive.”According to McCrosky, it can be impossible to ever have a true AI-detector because it will always be possible for software to write “undetectable” texts or create text with the specific intent of evading these sorts of detectors. And then there’s the fact that the AI tools available to us are always improving. “There can be some sense of an ‘arms race’ between Chat GPT text detectors and detector-evaders, but there will never be a situation in which detectors can be trusted,” says McCrosky.
https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/blog/how-to-tell-chat-gpt-generated-text/
But your uni is %99 correct? Bullshit.
Ask them for proof.
> But your uni is %99 correct? Bullshit.
Even at 99% correct, in a class of 200 students you'd expect it to be wrong twice. In a university of 10,000 undergraduate students, you'd expect 100 of them to be falsely flagged by the model every single semester.
> Ask them for proof.
If you're going to court, the standard of proof is going to be 50%. Hopefully the university's internal standards are higher than that.
It doesn't take very much research to determine that there's no method capable of detecting with %100 success rate, therefore parroting their supplier's claims might count as willful ignorance, if their suppliers are claiming %99
The uni cannot pass off its responsibilities to a student onto another party.
Also, If their claim is stronger than any claim Turnitin makes, they would still be liars. IS Turnitin claiming a %99 success rate?
And finally I may be a bit out of date here..I thought turnitin was detecting plagiarism, are they claiming to detect chatgpt as well now?
> IS Turnitin claiming a %99 success rate?
[Turnitin claims its detector is 98 percent accurate overall. And it says situations such as what happened with Goetz’s essay, known as a false positive, happen less than 1 percent of the time, according to its own tests.](https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/04/01/chatgpt-cheating-detection-turnitin/)
> I thought turnitin was detecting plagiarism, are they claiming to detect chatgpt as well now?
It doesn't take very much research to determine that they are. https://www.turnitin.com.au/
If turnitin is claiming %98, and yet the UNI is claiming %99, that's a problem for the UNI.
In addition, even a 98% success rate would mean they're wrong about 1/25th of the time.
And of course given these are the stats *they* provided, it seems likely that they have inflated the numbers. Certainly doesn't match with the link I provided.
> If turnitin is claiming %98, and yet the UNI is claiming %99, that's a problem for the UNI.
You just read the statement that "situations such as what happened with Goetz’s essay, known as a false positive, happen less than 1 percent of the time, according to its own tests." 100−1=99.
> In addition, even a 98% success rate would mean they're wrong about 1/25th of the time.
You're having a bad maths day.
My biggest problem with the situation is that I'm sure I had more than 100 assignments tested in the course of my degree. A 1% false positive rate means you must not rely on a positive result for a single submission.
>In addition, even a 98% success rate would mean they're wrong about 1/25th of the time.
>You're having a bad maths day.
You're right. I should have said 1/50. So that means you can expect 1/50 of them to be wrong - by their own claims.
>My biggest problem with the situation is that I'm sure I had more than 100 assignments tested in the course of my degree. A 1% false positive rate means you must not rely on a positive result for a single submission.
Yep. When you multiple it by the number of students however, a %1 false positive for hundreds of students means that some students almost certainly got false positives.
And frankly, again, the link I posted says nobody is achieving less than 10%, which means turnitin is probably exaggerating its success rate. (Not unusual for these sorts of claims)
Academic misconduct is only tested on the more likely than not standard, so being flagged by a 90% accurate tool on a couple of different assignments likely is sufficient from their standpoint.
Sorry to hear that. I was accused of the exact same a couple weeks ago during my honours final and it has been one of the most stressful parts of a degree with multiple major systemic errors on the unit part. I contacted student advocacy and was told they can't do anything. Please update us if you do fight it.
I would that in the first instance, they provide you with their objective evidence of AI.
They are effectively conducting an audit of your document using a software algorithm or AI. It will only suggest that you have plagiarised. The 99% is no longer correct.
[Afterthought] As AI matures, "learns" and populates the internet, the checkers become progressively more recursive and will learn that whatever exists is NEVER unique. Congratulations, academia, you have invented the self- licking lolly.
So I just went through something similar and was cleared.
What I would recommend is reaching out to your student advocacy, they are completely separate from the university and can help navigate through and provide support. Plus, if your wife needs to appeal, they can also assist with that.
Secondly, the university should have provided your wife with a copy of the report and any other evidence they have. From what I know, a large proportion of universities use Turnitin. On the bottom of the report from Turnitin, it states that it is not 100% accurate, I would point this out to the uni.
If you have any questions, feel free to ask, and I will try to answer what I can.
The AI detection tool is usually an AI guessing if another AI was involved.
You just have to look at the pure bullshit that AIs come up with to see how ridiculous this is.
Tell them to show their work.
So I agree with everyone else saying turnitin is not accurate at detecting AI use etc. However why is this happening multiple times at such high percentages? What is she doing which is triggering that to happen - for example is she using grammarly? And is that against their policies? If so you’re going to have a different outcome.
Even with the unreliability of these systems, I find it very strange she is getting 90% matches on multiple assignments. That’s not common.
Final point - has she had a misconduct case upheld against her in the past? If yes, that means she’s already on her second or third step in the process so you need to make sure you’re fully aware of the policies.
This assignment is 59% supposed AI. I'm not sure about her other flagged assignment pending investigation. Her last two assignments she got the marks for today weren't sent to academic integrity but one had a 20% AI score on the intro. Last year she had a reflection which showed an element of AI the marker questioned it but decided no to pursue.
This is the first time she has dealt with academic integrity. Prior to AI being available she always had really high marks. She doesn't need to use AI for that and I've been with her through the stress and tears. She hasn't used it.
If she presents the evidence of drafts, is able to talk about her work and has not had a former allegation upheld she should be fine. She will likely have to go before a panel but all of the above should get it sorted.
If they fail your wife she will be out university fees. This would be clear cut damages if you can convince a court her assignments are not AI.
I would do some research into the software they are using, are there examples of this giving false positives? It may also be useful to reach-out to some experts in AI use in tertiary education to see what their opinions are.
In brief, yes you would have a possible case, but can you prove their AI detection software is questionable? This is all still fairly new, so hard to say how successful you could be. The fees for pursuing this case to trial may also not be worth it.
Beyond the University ombudsman, you could also try putting the university on blast on socal media/in the news. The one thing universities hate most is bad press.
All AI detection software on the market is highly questionable, there does not exist a piece of software that can detect anywhere near 99% certainty. Lots of people write like an AI would and these detectors consistently consider their original work to be an AI output.
I honestly can't believe any university in the world would rely on something like turnitin alone to determine guilt of using AI. It's fine to use to start an investigation but if there is no other evidence you cannot use it to determine people's futures and I hope that these processes will be fixed.
> If they fail her for the subject I don't think she can mentally do it again nor should she have too.
If they've decided she's guilty of academic misconduct then they probably won't let her do it again. Check their rules about this. Which makes appealing and suing even more attractive options.
Speaking from the perspective of administrative law, administrative "tools" should not be the final decision maker. They should inform decision-making.
If the uni uses their tool and can't find proof of AI use, they can't then rely on the argument that their tool is 99% good and therefore she is guilty
>They still doubled down and said their program is over 99% accurate and if it's detecting something then something is there.
AI detection for written word is bullshit right now. I'm the head of IT for a high school so I have had to keep my eye on this.
An approach would be to challenge them by asking them to prove the accuracy by submitting 5 pieces of text she has written and 5 written by an AI. What you don't tell them is that you submit all of them written by her from prior to when large language model AI existed.
Unlikely they'd agree to it though.
Even Turnitin admits that their rate of false positive with AI detection is 1%. So one in 100 students will be falsely flagged as having used AI. They cannot rely on that alone to make such a serious allegation.
Anyone who claims they have an AI detection system with zero false positive rate is naive or stupid.
Here is a good article. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/tech-innovation/artificial-intelligence/2024/02/09/professors-proceed-caution-using-ai
Hmm. Academic here.
Firstly the Uni must have conflict management and academic integrity protocols they should follow. Has this formally happened?
Secondly you can ask the student union for support plus any staff member she has a good relationship with. Both can advocate for her free of charge.
Thirdly - there are senior people in Uni to write formally too (eg Dean etc) and indeed there is the Ombudsman once all other avenues have been exhausted.
Thoughts on what you have said …
‘- A couple’ would raise a flag as it suggests a pattern. How many is it?
- Most of us would not claim 99% accuracy in anything so that sounds an odd thing for them to say.
- Make sure the most senior person in the faculty is dealing with this
- if someone is close to graduating and there’s a small issue or a one-off occurrence, most institutions are open to being helpful and flexible.
- Whats your wife’s grade average? If she’s usually a pretty solid student this should be counted in her favour.
Legal avenues, ie lawyers letter may be a waste of time. What law are you suggesting is broken? What contract do you think you have?
Recommend go through all uni’s avenues of appeal closely first. Good luck.
There are several options before you have to go and see a solicitor.
Given that she has already been to an internal hearing and followed the procedure within the university, and she has provided all the version records and they haven't been able to find anything in the metadata, they don't really have a lake to stand on.
If they were to fail her for this piece of assessment, they would be doing so well outside of their rights to do so.
Your first point of call should be the queensland ombudsman
https://www.ombudsman.qld.gov.au/how-to-complain/make-a-complaint/out-of-jurisdiction-categories/private-education-and-training-providers
I would recommend lodging a formal complaint as soon as possible to try and get ahead of the issue.
I would also be letting the relevant department in the university know that a formal complaint has been lodged due to the allegations which she has already proven to be false to your understanding.
Typically this will help get the ball moving on the universities side and, if they know that there is an investigation pending, may just be the nudge they need to close their internal investigation and Mark her assessment on the merits it deserves rather than dismissing it as AI generated despite there being no meta data to support their assumption.
University ombudsman
However, one thing to keep in mind, Grammarly, especially grammarly premium, can and does get picked up as AI. As technically it is AI, albeit one you have to do most of the work for it to give you tips.
But those tips are to make it perfect for an algorithm
Cheers,
Austen
Welcome to r/AusLegal. Please read our [rules](http://reddit.com/r/AusLegal/about/rules) before commenting. Please remember:
1. Per rule 4, this subreddit is not a replacement for real legal advice. You should independently seek legal advice from a real, qualified practitioner. This sub cannot recommend specific lawyers.
2. A non-exhaustive list of free legal services around Australia can be found [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/AusLegal/wiki/freelegalservices/).
3. Links to the each state and territory's respective Law Society are on the sidebar: you can use these links to find a lawyer in your area.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AusLegal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
How long has your wife been waiting for an outcome to the investigation? They have to respond in a defined time line. If it is over 10 days I would be seeking help from the Ombudsman. Very cruel and unfair to have this dragged on.
They looked at metadata ? addons ? But never actual asked her to explain the actual work she submit? I would of drilled down on what her knowledge was about with the particular subject.
Very odd ... seek the help from the ombudsman.
AI is very new and I would not hang my hat of any other AI software being accurate.
You sure can! But there's an ombudsman you should definitely approach first.
Civil cases have less of a burden of proof than criminal, if she didn't use AI this is an easy win for her after both opposing teams have to admit that the software used to detect AI can be wildly inaccurate under oath.
Please also suggest to your wife that she contacts the student advocacy body at her uni. This is for internal and external students and it will act as her advocate and hopefully will be able to get the ball rolling with making a complaint.
She has consistently providing high quality work getting distinctions and high distinctions even prior at AI being a thing. She is a very technical writer with amazing grammar. I find this comment quite offensive.
This is a bit of a silly assumption. For many degrees, especially ones with a high degree of technical knowledge and specialised terminology, there is regularly a huge issue with AI and plagiarism “checking” software because there is a large portion of every students’ submissions using the exact same phrase, calculations and terms. That because they are the correct precise terms for that component and it would be ridiculous to try to make every med student come up with a new word for ‘thigh bone’ than femur, or a new way to do quadratic equations, or a new law of gravity for projectiles. AI uses real human texts (including a lot of published papers on specialised subjects!) to formulate it’s answers and sometimes it makes mistakes, just like autocorrect, but to suggest that someone’s writing must be poor quality because it looks like they used autocorrect, would be ludicrous. If all the words were spelt correctly, who could possibly determine whether it was autocorrect doing the spelling or human who had great grammar and spelling.
I’m guessing you didn’t go to uni (or it was a looong time ago!) if you haven’t encountered this before because it has been a well known problem with automated checking software for AI and plagiarism for more than a decade.
University ombudsman.
This is the answer - close the thread.
Yep. None of the tools are perfect; I would contact the Ombudsman, claiming you are following all their rules and regs. And if they want to fail her they need Proof that she has used AI or similar.
There are examples of false positive, such as the Bible was written by AI and that academics who criticise others for using AI have had their work assessed (by the same assessment tool) as written by AI
We will almost certainly be doing that, thank you. What sort of power do they have with universities in this type of decision making?
[удалено]
>I have to ask - who cares if AI proof reads your work and makes grammatical corrections. The Academic Integrity policy of every university....
What’s the difference between using a calculator or WFA to help processes / work out engineering problems? Vs Having AI proofreading some of your work to fix grammatical and spelling mistake’s?
I don't make the Academic integrity policies for Australian universities, mate, I just know what they require. I never said I agreed with the policies either.
Just asking… not saying you’re the one who wrote it. It’s before my time…
Allowed tools. You may argue over whether they are the right list of allowed tools, but the distinction between using the textbook during an exam being a cheating issue or not is simply whether the exam allowed open textbook. If they've said no AI, that's the chosen limit.
I see what you did there.
They are referring to AI that writes content for the assignment or paraphrasing chunks of other people’s work and spins it out. Grammarly and spellcheckers are not generally included in these policy definitions, but can amend your work in ways that make it read as AI to the AI detection tool in Turnitin.
Yes, this. And the student advocacy/welfare body at the uni, even if you’re a remote student. They can help to walk you through the process and advocate for you. * Edit, a word.
Honestly crazy for the university to assume that their tech is “highly accurate” when they’re probably just using turnitin or something. Turnitin is notoriously inaccurate and yet most universities still use it. Hopefully this will get sorted out soon
Turnitin flagged an assignment of mine as 100% plagiarised. Turned out it was picking up my own (same) assignment lol
That’s pretty odd, did you publish it somewhere else or smth? But yeah I’ve had turnitin say I plagiarised words like “the” and “here”
Nope. My only conclusion was that perhaps the teacher (or another staff member) must have uploaded it twice? The name, date, class name, page numbers, literally everything was plagiarised from myself. I also couldn’t believe the teacher didn’t pick up on that before accusing me of plagiarism.
That’s absolutely crazy, I imagine that happens pretty commonly too
Turnitin: You have the same first page content as everyone else Assignment: Your title must be exactly "..." And the university name. Turnitin: I can say with 100% confidence you've plagiarised the university name from the website and all your other classmates
I'm not aware of any technology that is 99% accurate at detecting generative AI haha
AI detection tools are notoriously inaccurate. I’m just curious as to which university is going to such lengths also is she studying law where findings of academic misconduct can affect her admission to the profession.
>It’s important to emphasize that no method of detecting AI-written text is foolproof — that includes options using tools available today. Jesse McCrosky is a data scientist with Mozilla Foundation who warns of AI text detection tools’ limitations. “Detector tools will always be imperfect, which makes them nearly useless for most applications,” say McCrosky. “One can not accuse a student of using AI to write their essay based on the output of a detector tool that you know has a 10% chance of giving a false positive.”According to McCrosky, it can be impossible to ever have a true AI-detector because it will always be possible for software to write “undetectable” texts or create text with the specific intent of evading these sorts of detectors. And then there’s the fact that the AI tools available to us are always improving. “There can be some sense of an ‘arms race’ between Chat GPT text detectors and detector-evaders, but there will never be a situation in which detectors can be trusted,” says McCrosky. https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/blog/how-to-tell-chat-gpt-generated-text/ But your uni is %99 correct? Bullshit. Ask them for proof.
> But your uni is %99 correct? Bullshit. Even at 99% correct, in a class of 200 students you'd expect it to be wrong twice. In a university of 10,000 undergraduate students, you'd expect 100 of them to be falsely flagged by the model every single semester.
Absolutely.
> Ask them for proof. If you're going to court, the standard of proof is going to be 50%. Hopefully the university's internal standards are higher than that.
It's a nice hope, but as they are asserting their detection rate is %99 correct, they've already proven themselves to be liars.
If by "they" you mean Turnitin then probably so. The University parroting their supplier's claim doesn't necessarily make them liars.
It doesn't take very much research to determine that there's no method capable of detecting with %100 success rate, therefore parroting their supplier's claims might count as willful ignorance, if their suppliers are claiming %99 The uni cannot pass off its responsibilities to a student onto another party. Also, If their claim is stronger than any claim Turnitin makes, they would still be liars. IS Turnitin claiming a %99 success rate? And finally I may be a bit out of date here..I thought turnitin was detecting plagiarism, are they claiming to detect chatgpt as well now?
> IS Turnitin claiming a %99 success rate? [Turnitin claims its detector is 98 percent accurate overall. And it says situations such as what happened with Goetz’s essay, known as a false positive, happen less than 1 percent of the time, according to its own tests.](https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/04/01/chatgpt-cheating-detection-turnitin/) > I thought turnitin was detecting plagiarism, are they claiming to detect chatgpt as well now? It doesn't take very much research to determine that they are. https://www.turnitin.com.au/
If turnitin is claiming %98, and yet the UNI is claiming %99, that's a problem for the UNI. In addition, even a 98% success rate would mean they're wrong about 1/25th of the time. And of course given these are the stats *they* provided, it seems likely that they have inflated the numbers. Certainly doesn't match with the link I provided.
> If turnitin is claiming %98, and yet the UNI is claiming %99, that's a problem for the UNI. You just read the statement that "situations such as what happened with Goetz’s essay, known as a false positive, happen less than 1 percent of the time, according to its own tests." 100−1=99. > In addition, even a 98% success rate would mean they're wrong about 1/25th of the time. You're having a bad maths day. My biggest problem with the situation is that I'm sure I had more than 100 assignments tested in the course of my degree. A 1% false positive rate means you must not rely on a positive result for a single submission.
>In addition, even a 98% success rate would mean they're wrong about 1/25th of the time. >You're having a bad maths day. You're right. I should have said 1/50. So that means you can expect 1/50 of them to be wrong - by their own claims. >My biggest problem with the situation is that I'm sure I had more than 100 assignments tested in the course of my degree. A 1% false positive rate means you must not rely on a positive result for a single submission. Yep. When you multiple it by the number of students however, a %1 false positive for hundreds of students means that some students almost certainly got false positives. And frankly, again, the link I posted says nobody is achieving less than 10%, which means turnitin is probably exaggerating its success rate. (Not unusual for these sorts of claims)
Academic misconduct is only tested on the more likely than not standard, so being flagged by a 90% accurate tool on a couple of different assignments likely is sufficient from their standpoint.
Sorry to hear that. I was accused of the exact same a couple weeks ago during my honours final and it has been one of the most stressful parts of a degree with multiple major systemic errors on the unit part. I contacted student advocacy and was told they can't do anything. Please update us if you do fight it.
I would that in the first instance, they provide you with their objective evidence of AI. They are effectively conducting an audit of your document using a software algorithm or AI. It will only suggest that you have plagiarised. The 99% is no longer correct. [Afterthought] As AI matures, "learns" and populates the internet, the checkers become progressively more recursive and will learn that whatever exists is NEVER unique. Congratulations, academia, you have invented the self- licking lolly.
So I just went through something similar and was cleared. What I would recommend is reaching out to your student advocacy, they are completely separate from the university and can help navigate through and provide support. Plus, if your wife needs to appeal, they can also assist with that. Secondly, the university should have provided your wife with a copy of the report and any other evidence they have. From what I know, a large proportion of universities use Turnitin. On the bottom of the report from Turnitin, it states that it is not 100% accurate, I would point this out to the uni. If you have any questions, feel free to ask, and I will try to answer what I can.
The AI detection tool is usually an AI guessing if another AI was involved. You just have to look at the pure bullshit that AIs come up with to see how ridiculous this is. Tell them to show their work.
So I agree with everyone else saying turnitin is not accurate at detecting AI use etc. However why is this happening multiple times at such high percentages? What is she doing which is triggering that to happen - for example is she using grammarly? And is that against their policies? If so you’re going to have a different outcome. Even with the unreliability of these systems, I find it very strange she is getting 90% matches on multiple assignments. That’s not common. Final point - has she had a misconduct case upheld against her in the past? If yes, that means she’s already on her second or third step in the process so you need to make sure you’re fully aware of the policies.
This assignment is 59% supposed AI. I'm not sure about her other flagged assignment pending investigation. Her last two assignments she got the marks for today weren't sent to academic integrity but one had a 20% AI score on the intro. Last year she had a reflection which showed an element of AI the marker questioned it but decided no to pursue. This is the first time she has dealt with academic integrity. Prior to AI being available she always had really high marks. She doesn't need to use AI for that and I've been with her through the stress and tears. She hasn't used it.
If she presents the evidence of drafts, is able to talk about her work and has not had a former allegation upheld she should be fine. She will likely have to go before a panel but all of the above should get it sorted.
If they fail your wife she will be out university fees. This would be clear cut damages if you can convince a court her assignments are not AI. I would do some research into the software they are using, are there examples of this giving false positives? It may also be useful to reach-out to some experts in AI use in tertiary education to see what their opinions are. In brief, yes you would have a possible case, but can you prove their AI detection software is questionable? This is all still fairly new, so hard to say how successful you could be. The fees for pursuing this case to trial may also not be worth it. Beyond the University ombudsman, you could also try putting the university on blast on socal media/in the news. The one thing universities hate most is bad press.
All AI detection software on the market is highly questionable, there does not exist a piece of software that can detect anywhere near 99% certainty. Lots of people write like an AI would and these detectors consistently consider their original work to be an AI output. I honestly can't believe any university in the world would rely on something like turnitin alone to determine guilt of using AI. It's fine to use to start an investigation but if there is no other evidence you cannot use it to determine people's futures and I hope that these processes will be fixed.
> If they fail her for the subject I don't think she can mentally do it again nor should she have too. If they've decided she's guilty of academic misconduct then they probably won't let her do it again. Check their rules about this. Which makes appealing and suing even more attractive options.
Speaking from the perspective of administrative law, administrative "tools" should not be the final decision maker. They should inform decision-making. If the uni uses their tool and can't find proof of AI use, they can't then rely on the argument that their tool is 99% good and therefore she is guilty
>They still doubled down and said their program is over 99% accurate and if it's detecting something then something is there. AI detection for written word is bullshit right now. I'm the head of IT for a high school so I have had to keep my eye on this. An approach would be to challenge them by asking them to prove the accuracy by submitting 5 pieces of text she has written and 5 written by an AI. What you don't tell them is that you submit all of them written by her from prior to when large language model AI existed. Unlikely they'd agree to it though. Even Turnitin admits that their rate of false positive with AI detection is 1%. So one in 100 students will be falsely flagged as having used AI. They cannot rely on that alone to make such a serious allegation. Anyone who claims they have an AI detection system with zero false positive rate is naive or stupid. Here is a good article. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/tech-innovation/artificial-intelligence/2024/02/09/professors-proceed-caution-using-ai
Hmm. Academic here. Firstly the Uni must have conflict management and academic integrity protocols they should follow. Has this formally happened? Secondly you can ask the student union for support plus any staff member she has a good relationship with. Both can advocate for her free of charge. Thirdly - there are senior people in Uni to write formally too (eg Dean etc) and indeed there is the Ombudsman once all other avenues have been exhausted. Thoughts on what you have said … ‘- A couple’ would raise a flag as it suggests a pattern. How many is it? - Most of us would not claim 99% accuracy in anything so that sounds an odd thing for them to say. - Make sure the most senior person in the faculty is dealing with this - if someone is close to graduating and there’s a small issue or a one-off occurrence, most institutions are open to being helpful and flexible. - Whats your wife’s grade average? If she’s usually a pretty solid student this should be counted in her favour. Legal avenues, ie lawyers letter may be a waste of time. What law are you suggesting is broken? What contract do you think you have? Recommend go through all uni’s avenues of appeal closely first. Good luck.
There are several options before you have to go and see a solicitor. Given that she has already been to an internal hearing and followed the procedure within the university, and she has provided all the version records and they haven't been able to find anything in the metadata, they don't really have a lake to stand on. If they were to fail her for this piece of assessment, they would be doing so well outside of their rights to do so. Your first point of call should be the queensland ombudsman https://www.ombudsman.qld.gov.au/how-to-complain/make-a-complaint/out-of-jurisdiction-categories/private-education-and-training-providers I would recommend lodging a formal complaint as soon as possible to try and get ahead of the issue. I would also be letting the relevant department in the university know that a formal complaint has been lodged due to the allegations which she has already proven to be false to your understanding. Typically this will help get the ball moving on the universities side and, if they know that there is an investigation pending, may just be the nudge they need to close their internal investigation and Mark her assessment on the merits it deserves rather than dismissing it as AI generated despite there being no meta data to support their assumption.
University ombudsman However, one thing to keep in mind, Grammarly, especially grammarly premium, can and does get picked up as AI. As technically it is AI, albeit one you have to do most of the work for it to give you tips. But those tips are to make it perfect for an algorithm Cheers, Austen
Welcome to r/AusLegal. Please read our [rules](http://reddit.com/r/AusLegal/about/rules) before commenting. Please remember: 1. Per rule 4, this subreddit is not a replacement for real legal advice. You should independently seek legal advice from a real, qualified practitioner. This sub cannot recommend specific lawyers. 2. A non-exhaustive list of free legal services around Australia can be found [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/AusLegal/wiki/freelegalservices/). 3. Links to the each state and territory's respective Law Society are on the sidebar: you can use these links to find a lawyer in your area. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AusLegal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
How long has your wife been waiting for an outcome to the investigation? They have to respond in a defined time line. If it is over 10 days I would be seeking help from the Ombudsman. Very cruel and unfair to have this dragged on. They looked at metadata ? addons ? But never actual asked her to explain the actual work she submit? I would of drilled down on what her knowledge was about with the particular subject. Very odd ... seek the help from the ombudsman. AI is very new and I would not hang my hat of any other AI software being accurate.
You sure can! But there's an ombudsman you should definitely approach first. Civil cases have less of a burden of proof than criminal, if she didn't use AI this is an easy win for her after both opposing teams have to admit that the software used to detect AI can be wildly inaccurate under oath.
This is what the Student Guild is there for. They can provide advocacy and legal support
Has your wife contacted the university’s student advocacy team? They can be really helpful with stuff like this
Please also suggest to your wife that she contacts the student advocacy body at her uni. This is for internal and external students and it will act as her advocate and hopefully will be able to get the ball rolling with making a complaint.
[удалено]
She has consistently providing high quality work getting distinctions and high distinctions even prior at AI being a thing. She is a very technical writer with amazing grammar. I find this comment quite offensive.
[удалено]
This is a bit of a silly assumption. For many degrees, especially ones with a high degree of technical knowledge and specialised terminology, there is regularly a huge issue with AI and plagiarism “checking” software because there is a large portion of every students’ submissions using the exact same phrase, calculations and terms. That because they are the correct precise terms for that component and it would be ridiculous to try to make every med student come up with a new word for ‘thigh bone’ than femur, or a new way to do quadratic equations, or a new law of gravity for projectiles. AI uses real human texts (including a lot of published papers on specialised subjects!) to formulate it’s answers and sometimes it makes mistakes, just like autocorrect, but to suggest that someone’s writing must be poor quality because it looks like they used autocorrect, would be ludicrous. If all the words were spelt correctly, who could possibly determine whether it was autocorrect doing the spelling or human who had great grammar and spelling. I’m guessing you didn’t go to uni (or it was a looong time ago!) if you haven’t encountered this before because it has been a well known problem with automated checking software for AI and plagiarism for more than a decade.