Slop detectors might as well be random number generators, it will never give you 0% because it's slop in and of itself.
this post was submitted on 15 Jun 2026
55 points (89.9% liked)
No Stupid Questions
48489 readers
945 users here now
No such thing. Ask away!
!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.
Credits
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Sounds like someone should file a lawsuit against the school for using ai ai detectors that don't work right.
At the least there should be an appeals process, anonymously, where the decision goes to a jury of faculty or something if not settled otherwise.
No. There is nothing you can do. AI detection is bullshit and there is no way to game it to reduce how much it determines you to be an AI. Your school is punishing you for it existing, and thus they remove the punishment for those using it.
years ago, we were told to make our writing formal and dry. now, the best way to make sure it doesn't get flagged as false positives is tone and personality of your writing. an AI will never have a joke in a footnote, actual papers sometimes do.
My experience is the opposite. Even for a work that was 100% obviously written by AI, an AI detector only gave me 30% probability. That specific work was written with a PhD level and had bogus sources, one litteraly having copilot in the name. Coming from a 19 years old first year college student.... On every work I presented, the AI evaluated the probability very low while for me (I know the students, I've spent 15 weeks with them) l, they obviously didn't wrote the papers. When I pointed to the model that I was sceptical, I suddenly change the cheating probability to a much higher score. So basically it just tolds you what you want to hear. The college told us they wont consider cheating unless we have proof so we just end up giving good grades to everyone. Two scenarios here, either about 70% of students use some sort of AI to write these days, or we have the smartest generation ever in front of us, with 19 years old kids having the level of their teacher aftef a year in College. University and College administration want to give diplomas, the students want to graduate, and the teachers are now just a tool to get this done.
Universities like Hardvard recently adopted internal rules preventing a class from having more than 40% A or A+ in the final result, because it was getting absurd, with some classes having 80% of the students with an A. I'm seriously considering leaving college teaching because I can't understand what's happening.
i wonder if it eventually comes to having to resort to legal action because of this. Those detectors are unreliable yet you can be penalized based on what they spew. And lost grades is lasting consequence.
Meanwhile the same schools that punish students for using AI (even when they didn't) are then hiring speakers to cram the "AI is the future, get used to it or get left behind" message down students throats.
its actually quite weird how strongly the ai is being pushed everywhere. Though I guess it just proves how deep the rot goes.
As someone who teaches CS and grades assignments, the last few years have been really rough. Academic dishonesty has skyrocketed with models becoming smarter and students becoming more dependent on them. Any assignment that's above average will make me suspicious, and when it appears to be 100% AI generated, the feeling that I spend more time grading than the student spent working on it is awful. Even when I'm almost sure a work is AI generated, unless there are some dumb leftovers such as "As an AI assistant [...]", I can never be 100% sure. This causes me a lot of headaches because the only thing worse than rewarding dishonesty would be not appropriately rewarding an outstanding assignment.
As much as I'd love to have à software tell me with 100% certainty which parts (if any) of an assignment are AI written, AI detectors are all snake oil, no exception. They exploit teachers' helplessness to make false promises that we really want to believe in.
Moreover, I don't think fully banning AI use is a sensible thing to do. LLMs are a thing, whether we like them or not, and using them in a sensible way is a useful skill to learn. There's one big issue though : on one hand, assignments are made so that the problems students have to solve all have well-known solutions. This is required to make sure the assignment is doable in the first place, and that teachers will be able to help. On the other hand, LLMs are disproportionately good at classic assignment problems since there are so many published solutions online (which then end up in training datasets). Moreover, assignements are usually made to guide students through a larger problem by breaking it down into smaller problems, which is basically the perfect prompt for a LLM. This means students can get away with the laziest uses of LLMs (which usually won't work with real world problems). In the worst cases, the only "skill" some students learn is to throw a PDF at whatever AI they paid for, ask it to solve the assignment, and copy paste the output without thoroughly reading it first.
Teachers clearly need to adapt. There will always be a few students who fail to learn in every class, but when so many students don't learn, it's the teacher who is failing to teach.
I'm also a teacher. I teach programming. I teach adults, some even 50+. I love teaching the older students, because they really care, they really want to learn, they put in effort and attention, all of them. Younger students can be just as awesome, but there are more bad apples in that category. It's not really agism though, because it's really just the people that want to get rich quick that are the bad apples. Those are inherently on the younger side.
My university primarily teaches online, through Teams. Lessons are not mandatory. Lately it happens a lot that simeone hands in their finals assignment and it looks shiny. I've never heard of this student or talked to them. They never handed in any homework or asked any questions. They didn't even watch the recorded lessons. So I look at the code and it's all smells of AI.
In this case our process is to fike it with the exam commission and they will have a meeting with the student to prove theyy actually did it themselves. I've sit in with a few of these meetings, but I've only seen one student be able to answer any of the questions we ask them about their own work.
This works pretty well, because I don't have to prove AI, I just have to point to suspicion. Than the students have to prove that they know what they have done. Which is a "guilty until proven innocent" kind of sitution, but it's very easy to pass if you're actually innocent and did your own work.
I think this is the tried and tested way to test for plagiarism, but now applied to AI usage. Because in fact, AI usage in a graduation project is plagiarism. Time consuming, but effective.
You do really need to make a stand on this. Personally, I would offer a test or demonstration where you write a paper in a place where you can be assured to not be using an AI, and have them check the false-positive rate to show the vendor they have is bad. Short of that, you're really talking about pushback on an administration that clearly has only mediocre ideas, and is willing to let students suffer the brunt of their bad decision-making until you make it a problem for them.
Students should have a way to seek real recourse about this. Use it now and use it early to establish a record of receiving false positives, Otherwise you risk some professor later really causing problems with a 5% false positive rate and it being a huge problem for you.
Also, given the cost of higher education these days, they really should do better
You could use something that automatically keeps track of revision history, like Google Docs. If your writing is flagged by their AI detectors, show them the full history.
Good idea!
Write it by hand. Hand it over in person.
This only proves you can write. You can still generate the text using an LLM and write it down with a pen.
I remember not long ago seeing an image of handwritten homework where the student answered "as a large language model …".
I had a student give me handwritten homework for German class. He’d written directions, and there was no instance of the word “left,” but the word ”remaining” was in every other sentence. It was very obvious
Do LLMs do that? That sounds more like dictionary use without thinking.
I did ask him about it and he admitted it, but if he had done it with his own brain, it would have been worse, because we went over it in class a bunch first and he was capable of it then.
It was totally pointless though, because the homework was for extra credit. Luckily, I didn’t have to pursue it further, but there are some programs that would have expelled him for it. I can understand that, but I don’t think things would be much improved if he got expelled for it.
I just told him to stop being an idiot, because he’s not learning anything and the other teachers are probably better at spotting it. He was relatively dismissive at first, but he really didn’t learn very much German during a study abroad year, which is actively difficult to do. Now that they’re leaving, he’s realized that he didn’t get much out of the year, academically. Not a big deal, but he’s going to delay his graduation and see some minor consequences. Hopefully it’ll get his head on straight.
I does create friction for the person who has to enter it into the checker though
"I can't read this kid's handwriting... Did he write an email dash?"
Get a video camera to film you while you write and screen record what you do on your laptop. That way you have proof that you didn't use models. And I'm only half joking.
As much as I loathe to suggest this: maybe you should try to prompt some models on topics you write on. Just to see what it spits out so you can avoid sounding alike. Same for visuals it would come up with.
Or you could see if some industrious fellow student has found a copy of the software the faculty use to do a trial run. It may have fallen off a truck somewhere. Happens all the time! Just make sure you protect yourself.
I guess you could make a document history. Make a copy for each day you work on that document. Idk if they are going to accept it as proof though..
This is what Git was built for. It's not just for software
AI tends to write correct English, so you could try adding typos, grammatical mistakes, incorrect punctuation, wrong capitalization, etc. /joke
People already prompt their AI to do this.
Personally I think trying to detect AI is a lost cause and they need to do something different. Back in my day all tests were in person with no tools except a calculator, but I can see how that won't scale.
or make them write papers in a computer labs, where there is usually a moniter person that watches people like a hawk.
Unironically have already been doing this. Marks lost from typos are much less than those from AI false positives.
You could ask your tutors what you can do to ease their conscience in regards to AI use. If they don't have suggested protocols or don't take that as an indicator of your honesty, they're just fucking punishing you for nothing
...in conclusion: fuck China, Donald Trump raped children and SpaceX is overvalued.
Wrong post?
No, it's things that ai isn't supposed to be able to say. Half joking.
Oh lol mb, it was such a generic Lemmy comment to tell
from a generic lemmy commenter.