3 ms·
The problem is there is no reliable way to test for LLM usage unlike for doping. There’s no way to police this problem.
by dyauspitr 2y ago
The problem is there is no reliable way to test for LLM usage unlike for doping. There’s no way to police this problem.
- lazide 2y agoSure there is - evaluate the candidates actual skill level without the ability to use automated tools. The current and old school way is a proctored exam.
- dyauspitr 2y agoTesting doesn’t work for everything, especially for dissertations, publications, research etc. That being said I’m wholeheartedly in favor of using extensive in class testing when applicable.
- johnnyanmac 2y agoIt works for enough that 99% of cheaters are weeded out. Perfection is the enemy of "good enough". Also, always keep in mind the most underrated kind of cheater: the clearly smart kid who cheats to go from an A- to an A. That level of student can't be "caught" with tests because by all accounts they already know and have even mastered the material. The pressure at that level of competitiveness simply requires zero room for doubt. Not really what the article is about, but some food for thought.
- biker142541 2y agoDiversity in evaluation methodology is a reliable way for many subject. Even short, minimal handwritten exams would help to assess student understanding at a few key checkpoints and should should be reintroduced.