News: 1674502808

  ARM Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set fire to him and he's warm for the rest of his life (Terry Pratchett, Jingo)

Universities offered software to sniff out ChatGPT-written essays

(2023/01/23)


Feature Turnitin, best known for its anti-plagiarism software used by tens of thousands of universities and schools around the world, is building a tool to detect text generated by AI.

Large language models have gained traction since the commercial release of OpenAI's GPT-3 in 2020. Now [1]multiple companies have built their own rival machine learning systems, kickstarting a new wave of startups developing products powered by generative AI. These models operate like general-purpose chatbots. Users type instructions, and they will respond with passages of coherent, convincing text.

Students are increasingly turning to AI tools to complete assignments, while teachers are only beginning to consider their impact and role in education. Opinions are divided. Some believe the technology can hone writing skills, while others see it as cheating. Schools in California, New York, Virginia, and Alabama have blocked pupils from accessing the latest ChatGPT model on public networks, [2]according to Forbes.

[3]

Education departments aren't quite sure what academic policies should be introduced to regulate the use of AI text generators. Besides, all rules would be difficult to enforce anyway considering there is currently no effective way to detect machine-written work. Enter Turnitin. Founded in 1998, the US company sells software that calculates how similar a particular essay is compared to content from a large database of papers, webpages, and books to look for signs of plagiarism.

[4]

[5]

Turnitin was acquired by media giant Advanced Publications for $1.75 billion in 2019, and its software has been [6]used by 15,000 institutions across 140 countries. With over two decades of experience, Turnitin has a broad reach in education and has amassed a huge repository of student writing, making it the ideal company to develop an academic AI text detector.

Turnitin has been quietly building the software for years ever since the release of GPT-3, Annie Chechitelli, chief product officer, told The Register . The rush to give educators the capability to identify text written by humans and computers has become more intense with the launch of its more powerful successor, ChatGPT. As AI continues to progress, universities and schools need to be able to protect academic integrity now more than ever.

[7]

"​Speed matters. We're hearing from teachers just give us something," Chechitelli said. Turnitin hopes to launch its software in the first half of this year. "It's going to be pretty basic detection at first, and then we'll throw out subsequent quick releases that will create a workflow that's more actionable for teachers." The plan is to make the prototype free for its existing customers as the company collects data and user feedback.

"At the beginning, we really just want to help the industry and help educators get their legs under them and feel more confident. And to get as much usage as we can early on; that's important to make a successful tool. Later on, we'll determine how we're going to productize it," she said.

Patterns in AI writing

Although text generated by AI is convincing, there are telltale signs that reveal an algorithm's handiwork. The writing is usually bland and unoriginal; tools like ChatGPT regurgitate existing ideas and viewpoints and don't have a distinct voice. Humans can sometimes spot AI-generated text, but machines are much better at the job.

[8]Publisher halts AI article assembly line after probe

[9]Mentally scarred: Kenyan workers taught ChatGPT to recognize offensive text

[10]OpenAI's ChatGPT is a morally corrupting influence

[11]Publisher breaks news by using bots to write inaccurate stories

Turnitin's VP of AI, Eric Wang, said there are obvious patterns in AI writing that computers can detect. "Even though it feels human-like to us, [machines write using] a fundamentally different mechanism. It's picking the most probable word in the most probable location, and that's a very different way of constructing language [compared] to you and I," he told The Register .

"We read by jumping back and forth our eyes without even knowing it, or flitting back and forth between words, between paragraphs, and sometimes between pages. We'll flip back and forth. We also tend to write with a future state of mind. I might be writing, and I'm thinking about something, a paragraph, a sentence, a chapter; the end of the essay is linked in my mind to the sentence I'm writing even though the sentences between now and then have yet to be written."

ChatGPT, however, doesn't have this kind of flexibility and can only generate new words based on previous sentences, he explained. Turnitin's detector works by predicting what words AI is more likely to generate in a given text snippet. "It's very bland statistically. Humans don't tend to consistently use a high probability word in high probability places, but GPT-3 does so our detector really cues in on that," he said.

[12]

Wang said Turnitin's detector is based on the same architecture as GPT-3 and described it as a miniature version of the model. "We are in many ways I would [say] fighting fire with fire. There's a detector component attached to it instead of a generate component. So what it's doing is it's reading language in the exact same way GPT-3 reads language, but instead of spitting out more language, it gives us a prediction of whether we think this passage looks like [it's from] GPT-3."

The company is still deciding how best to present its detector's results to teachers using the tool. "It's a difficult challenge. How do you tell an instructor in a small amount of space what they want to see?" Chechitelli said. They might want to see a percentage that shows how much of an essay seems to be AI-written, or they might want confidence levels showing whether the detector's prediction confidence is low, medium, or high to assess accuracy.

The software isn't designed with the goal of getting ChatGPT banned in academia. Although it could deter students from using these types of tools, Turnitin believes its detector will instead enable teachers and students to trust each other and the technology.

"I think there is a major shift in the way we create content and the way we work," Wang said. "Certainly that extends to the way we learn. We need to be thinking long term about how we teach. How do we learn in a world where this technology exists? I think there is no putting the genie back in the bottle. Any tool that gives visibility to the use of these technologies is going to be valuable because those are the foundational building blocks of trust and transparency." ®

Get our [13]Tech Resources



[1] https://www.theregister.com/2022/03/03/language_model_gpt3/

[2] https://www.forbes.com/sites/ariannajohnson/2023/01/18/chatgpt-in-schools-heres-where-its-banned-and-how-it-could-potentially-help-students/

[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/aiml&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2Y88Rj6QC0yvVZY61gjQaxAAAAEo&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0

[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/aiml&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44Y88Rj6QC0yvVZY61gjQaxAAAAEo&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0

[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/aiml&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33Y88Rj6QC0yvVZY61gjQaxAAAAEo&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0

[6] https://www.turnitin.com/blog/a-new-path-and-purpose-for-turnitin

[7] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/aiml&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44Y88Rj6QC0yvVZY61gjQaxAAAAEo&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0

[8] https://www.theregister.com/2023/01/23/ai_news_roundup/

[9] https://www.theregister.com/2023/01/20/kenyan_workers_chatgpt/

[10] https://www.theregister.com/2023/01/20/chatgpt_morally_corrupting/

[11] https://www.theregister.com/2023/01/19/cnet_reviewing_ai_authored_stories/

[12] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/aiml&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33Y88Rj6QC0yvVZY61gjQaxAAAAEo&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0

[13] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/



Just expell anyone caught

Anonymous Coward

using ChatGPT.

Very simple. Even students high on weed could understand it.

ChatGPT will become a pariah. IMHO and as a writer of fiction, the sooner the better.

Re: Just expell anyone caught

Version 1.0

My immediate thought was "Let's ban politicians from using ChatGPT too!" but now I'm wondering if using ChatGPT might not improve a lot of the things we're seeing politicians say?

Re: Just expell anyone caught

doublelayer

One problem is that a tool like this will only give you a prediction of whether GPT was used. It can say that such a thing is probable, but not that it is certain. If a student denies it and you have a tool which says "computer says yes" but you can't verify it, what will you do? If you catch someone using it to generate work or can prove it with certainty, then treating it as a violation of policies against cheating makes sense, but there will have to be some plan for cases where it's in doubt whether it happened.

Local Minima in the intellectual content?

Brewster's Angle Grinder

So, if the makers of CheatYourWayToADegreeGPT want to evade this, they have to make their language model pick less obvious words. But a lower probability word is more likely to be wrong. And so the tool becomes less useful.

Is this game over? Or can the language models pick rare enough words that they look human to the detectors while still making enough sense for them to be worthwhile to use? Or could you run a filter over the output that substitutes synonyms and fuzzes it to make the language model output look more human?

I guess, we're about to find out!

Re: Local Minima in the intellectual content?

Roland6

It might be harder than that...

A question has to be how individual the responses ChatGPT gives are. If they are not personalised we can expect at some point several students on the same course etc. will hand in work that is broadly identical.

Naturally, if a savvy lecturer submitted the question to ChatGPT before they issued it to the students, they would have a reference that will assist them in detecting the use of ChatGPT...

So CheatYourWayToADegreeGPT is going to have to take the ChatGPT results and personalise them - by training it on a user's previous essays?

What are the results from testing against realworld data?

Roland6

Given ChatGPT can generate output good enough to fool recruiters:

https://news.sky.com/story/recruitment-team-unwittingly-recommends-chatgpt-for-job-interview-12788770

[The linked articles:

https://news.sky.com/story/the-ultimate-homework-cheat-how-teachers-are-facing-up-to-chatgpt-12780601

https://news.sky.com/story/chatgpt-we-let-an-ai-chatbot-help-write-an-article-heres-how-it-went-12763244

are also worth a read.]

I would want to test this tool against such output.

However, I suspect this will be an ongoing arms race as ChatGPT steadily improves, so the only natural way forward will be for Universities to increase "contact time" with on-going in-person viva style investigation of understanding and research.

Private School - What's Old Is New Again!

The Oncoming Scorn

Had a teacher come to me & ask if there was a way to test for plagiarism in a pupils essay, so we cut & pasted the first three lines into the Google & got a match for the whole essay, with one or two minor differences for that personal "touch".

The Guy on the Right Doesn't Stand a Chance
The guy on the right has the Osborne 1, a fully functional computer system
in a portable package the size of a briefcase. The guy on the left has an
Uzi submachine gun concealed in his attache case. Also in the case are four
fully loaded, 32-round clips of 125-grain 9mm ammunition. The owner of the
Uzi is going to get more tactical firepower delivered -- and delivered on
target -- in less time, and with less effort. All for $795. It's inevitable.
If you're going up against some guy with an Osborne 1 -- or any personal
computer -- he's the one who's in trouble. One round from an Uzi can zip
through ten inches of solid pine wood, so you can imagine what it will do
to structural foam acrylic and sheet aluminum. In fact, detachable magazines
for the Uzi are available in 25-, 32-, and 40-round capacities, so you can
take out an entire office full of Apple II or IBM Personal Computers tied
into Ethernet or other local-area networks. What about the new 16-bit
computers, like the Lisa and Fortune? Even with the Winchester backup,
they're no match for the Uzi. One quick burst and they'll find out what
Unix means. Make your commanding officer proud. Get an Uzi -- and come home
a winner in the fight for office automatic weapons.
-- "InfoWorld", June, 1984