Back to search

Article

The Base-Rate Trap in Generative AI Text Detection: Why Detectors Cannot Serve as Standalone Evidence of Academic Misconduct, and Who Bears the Cost

2026-08-04

Abstract excerpt

<title>Abstract</title> <p>Purpose. Higher education institutions increasingly rely on generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) text detectors to police academic misconduct, and adoption decisions are usually justified by reported accuracy or area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). This article argues that these metrics are the wrong basis for consequential decisions about individual stud...

Topics

Open a Topic to create a Post that cites this publication.

Identifiers and source

Literature Corpus work
5fb594af-ae10-568b-82d3-9b58f5cef5ae
DOI
10.21203/rs.3.rs-10547782/v1
Open publication

Related research

Semantic proximity does not establish scientific evidence.

Click a neighbor to travelStep 1 · 12 closest
Interactive article relationship graphSelect a related publication card to move it into the centre and load its closest explainable connections. Solid lines are source-backed structured connections. Dashed lines are semantic discovery signals and are not scientific evidence.
The Base-Rate Trap in Generative AI Text Detection: Why Detectors Cannot Serve as Standalone Evidence of Academic Misconduct, and Who Bears the CostDOI 10.21203/rs.3.rs-10547782/v1
Select a neighboring publication to make it the new centre.