‘But there is a difference between recognising AI use and proving its use. So I tried an experiment. … I received 122 paper submissions. Of those, the Trojan horse easily identified 33 AI-generated papers. I sent these stats to all the students and gave them the opportunity to admit to using AI before they were locked into failing the class. Another 14 outed themselves. In other words, nearly 39% of the submissions were at least partially written by AI.‘
Article archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20251125225915/https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/set-trap-to-catch-students-cheating-ai_uk_691f20d1e4b00ed8a94f4c01
Do you then check those historical details against trusted sources? If so, how often do they need correction?
I do, but it's for fiction, so if some thing end up through the cracks, I think it'll be ok. It gets a few things wrong or confused maybe 10% of the time.
Honestly though, I'm finding ChatGTP way smarter than the Google AI. Google's is a fucking moron. GPT is like Joe from Idiocracy with his coffee.