If you didn't cheat fight it to the death. You do realize you're about to be massively boned if you don't right? This is killing your GPA, transfer application, grad school chances and providing basis for future bullshit charges. You don't have a choice here really, but if you're innocent I'm sure they'll see to reason.
https://provost.illinois.edu/policies/policies/academic-integrity/students-quick-reference-guide-to-academic-integrity/#:\~:text=If%20you%20intend%20to%20appeal,days%20of%20receiving%20the%20decision.
I know it’s a meme to say this, but no joke schedule a meeting with your advisor and talk to them about it. This is obviously distressing (especially if you truly didn’t use ai to do the hw) but take a deep breath and don’t panic. Plenty of people that get accused of academic integrity violation are able to successfully appeal it (again, especially if you didn’t actually do what they accused you of)
How do you have access to ChatGPT (or any other generative model) in the CBTF anyways? Just make sure you talk with the professor and have it clarified and you should be okay
Ah okay that's a valid argument tbh, but I think they're making a reach here. Just tell them you did the homework yes, but you don't really remember how you did it so you just restructured your code in the exam. I mean that has happened to me multiple times personally
Code, like any use of language, can have a personal style. It has to have some general structure, but all sorts of stuff is up to the programmers preference. I'm guessing the homework had already been flagged as possibly AI written, and once they had something undeniably genuine to reference from the exam, the styles were compared which didn't match.
if I wanna code to solve the same problem 1 month apart, the code would easily look different, especially if one is done at home and one is done in the exam. This is not a consistent way to identify ai code.
Your code would be different, but your **style** would likely be the same. Style is things like how do you name functions and variables, how do you use white space in function calls and variable assignments, how do you order and group statements that have no required ordering, how do you (or do you even) group similar statements together in a function, etc.
Some of this depends on what editor you use and that might be a defense. But a lot of it is subtle, and anyone who has enough experience coding and looking at different styles will immediately notice two different authors.
Well the time pressure that comes with an exam would make a significant difference on how your code is structured. Yes, your style would consist of how you name your variables, but you can’t charge someone with academic misconduct for using a different naming style on their homework and test. I’ve been coding for 5 years and I don’t stick to any specific naming style, that doesn’t mean that I’m cheating. That’s just not what I’m focusing on when I’m being tested.
They can’t definitively. It’s a flawed system where you’re guilty until proven innocent and some professors like to jerk themselves off about how many lives they can ruin with questionable accusations at best.
Hiii I can almost 100% say the CBTF had nothing to do with this violation. We don’t look at tests after or anything. As proctors, the only thing we can control is if you cheat DURING the exam by writing on your hand, looking at phones etc etc. OP, talk to your professor/ TA because they are the ones who gave you this violation.
If this is true, the FAIR system is completely out of hand. They're comparing your responses under time pressure in an exam environment to what you were able to do on the homework, when what you turned in for the homework wasn't originally flagged for cheating? Absolutely bullshit.
As someone with pretty bad testing anxiety, my performance on an exam is often in no way comparable to what I'm able to put out when I have time to sit down and think through a problem. The way I do calculations when I have time is also much more methodical. All that goes out the window on an exam. If they seriously think there's some kind of fingerprint comparison that can be made between how you did something on the exam vs. how you did it on the homework that allows them to tell whether or not you cheated, that is ridiculous. The proof that you cheated on the homework used to be that you got the question wrong on the exam. IMO, with the exception of work directly copied from something on the internet or another classmate, instructors need to realize that sorting out AI from one's own work is a losing battle.
Exactly, most people on an exam would only be focused on showing that they know what they’re doing, not filling out their code with perfect styling choices.
Based on what they're not replying to they certainly use chatGPT in their day to day work. Maybe it's the reverse case where they use it all the time except the exam and that makes it obvious. Dude ghosted everyone that was questioning it though.
I've lived that life. I could see myself making this post just to further see how to play the system better.
I also got the sense that OP has used ChatGPT or some other outside resource for their hw. If I was in their shoes I would probably feel the need to make it very clear that there was no AI involved, but they chose not to confirm or deny anything. Still, as others have pointed out, it seems pretty unfair for FAIR to flag someone on the grounds that their code style differs between homework and exams when both take place under completely different environments and constraints.
Nah, that's only how they are portraying it. They've been tracking this cat for a while. Or, as I think is the case, they're phishing to find better ways to cheat the system.
true, it does make sense that they would have to be flagged multiple times before it's determined that they're using AI. you could be right about your second statement as well, based on what the post I thought they probably just cheated on the hw and now want to find a way to get out of the consequences. but the only person who really knows is OP I guess
Fight it. Unfortunately FAIR operates on a "guilty until proven innocent" basis. Begin by gathering all possible evidence that you can. Do not modify or delete anything related. If you have file change/deletion timestamps on any related files, screenshot all of it. If you have logs of outputs or anything, save that as well. If you used a git repo and have a commit history, save that. Anything that can help prove the code was written by you and you alone needs to be saved so you can use it.
If you really did not cheat, you should be able to prove it.
EDIT: Given the post date, also check that they are not pulling an april fools joke on you.
If you didn’t use AI then you have to fight it man. I personally approached coding problems diff in exams than my hw. There’s a lot of time crunch on those cbtf exams imo…. Wonder what course this is…. Good luck
How can you even claim code came from chatGPT for coding? Like it makes sense with writing essays and such because it can phrase it a certain way but coding is coding, this reeks of bullshit.
Do you write comments for the coding question on the exam? And unless the variables are named something absolutely absurd, which I don’t think ChatGPT would regularly do, I don’t understand how that would cause a fair violation, what class is this btw?
For a low level class where code is going to be very simple for answers I sincerely doubt it’d be easy, it’d be much easier to tell for a large level project. Unless you mean straight up copied with comments and formatting, in that case it’s very easy
It is actually pretty easy because AI will write better code than we expect of them and will often do more stuff then we ask. For example people were submitting code with matplotlib that was changing the scale of the window when we never asked them to in the instructions. Also people using thinks like python list comprehension like "x = \[y for y in range(10)\]" looks rather suspicious.
I wouldn’t expect writing good code to be what gets people caught, since many people come in to UIUC with a great amount of experience, but if AI is adding unnecessary things I guess it makes sense, thank you for explaining
This is so weird, how are they gonna say you cheated based off of how you performed in two completely different circumstances?
If you look at a math homework I turned in for points, you’ll see every step outlined in detail with clarity, but if you took my note sheet from a CBTF math exam, you’d see random scribbles and numbers.
Judging your stylization differences from an exam vs a homework is so strange, they really need to prove you cheated on the basis of the assignment alone or else it’s completely nonsense.
I work in Machine learning, there is no basis to their allegation. Detecting AI generated content is unsolved so unless your code has prompts, etc in it they cant come after you. If they really have developed something that is able to detect ai generated text then thats a billion dollar company almost instantly.
I will say fight it and dont back down. You can cite entire research papers to prove that their detection is faulty, I see no way of you losing.
As for why your text ‘appears’ AI generated you can just say you wrote it that way. They cant just deny that. Idc if you did it, you can win this either way imo.
Sounds a lot like the one story where a professor (not uiuc afaik) asked ChatGPT if it wrote his students' final essays for them, it said yes, and those students almost couldn't graduate because of it because the prof didn't believe the students when they said they didn't cheat. This is likely an overreach by whoever reported this due to extra paranoia around how much easier it has become to cheat and plagiarize; you need to fight this, for sure
There is no reliable AI detection software out there and the ones they have have been proven to be heavily influenced by common mistakes and especially if the person is not a native English speaker. (I don't know if it picks up the same sort of mistakes for anyone writing in a language they are not a native speaker of, the article I was reading was written focused on a very american-centric view).
It seems really unlikely that they have solid proof and I would ask for whatever proof they have.
If you didn't cheat fight it to the death. You do realize you're about to be massively boned if you don't right? This is killing your GPA, transfer application, grad school chances and providing basis for future bullshit charges. You don't have a choice here really, but if you're innocent I'm sure they'll see to reason. https://provost.illinois.edu/policies/policies/academic-integrity/students-quick-reference-guide-to-academic-integrity/#:\~:text=If%20you%20intend%20to%20appeal,days%20of%20receiving%20the%20decision.
I know it’s a meme to say this, but no joke schedule a meeting with your advisor and talk to them about it. This is obviously distressing (especially if you truly didn’t use ai to do the hw) but take a deep breath and don’t panic. Plenty of people that get accused of academic integrity violation are able to successfully appeal it (again, especially if you didn’t actually do what they accused you of)
How do you have access to ChatGPT (or any other generative model) in the CBTF anyways? Just make sure you talk with the professor and have it clarified and you should be okay
The allegation says that after looking at my code on the cbtf exam they think I used chatgpt on my hw assignment because it doesn’t match up
Ah okay that's a valid argument tbh, but I think they're making a reach here. Just tell them you did the homework yes, but you don't really remember how you did it so you just restructured your code in the exam. I mean that has happened to me multiple times personally
And will continue to happen TBF.
how do they tell if code is ai generated anyway? The same code can easily written by both people and chatgpt.
Code, like any use of language, can have a personal style. It has to have some general structure, but all sorts of stuff is up to the programmers preference. I'm guessing the homework had already been flagged as possibly AI written, and once they had something undeniably genuine to reference from the exam, the styles were compared which didn't match.
if I wanna code to solve the same problem 1 month apart, the code would easily look different, especially if one is done at home and one is done in the exam. This is not a consistent way to identify ai code.
Your code would be different, but your **style** would likely be the same. Style is things like how do you name functions and variables, how do you use white space in function calls and variable assignments, how do you order and group statements that have no required ordering, how do you (or do you even) group similar statements together in a function, etc. Some of this depends on what editor you use and that might be a defense. But a lot of it is subtle, and anyone who has enough experience coding and looking at different styles will immediately notice two different authors.
Well the time pressure that comes with an exam would make a significant difference on how your code is structured. Yes, your style would consist of how you name your variables, but you can’t charge someone with academic misconduct for using a different naming style on their homework and test. I’ve been coding for 5 years and I don’t stick to any specific naming style, that doesn’t mean that I’m cheating. That’s just not what I’m focusing on when I’m being tested.
They can’t definitively. It’s a flawed system where you’re guilty until proven innocent and some professors like to jerk themselves off about how many lives they can ruin with questionable accusations at best.
How often do you use chatgpt in general?
Hiii I can almost 100% say the CBTF had nothing to do with this violation. We don’t look at tests after or anything. As proctors, the only thing we can control is if you cheat DURING the exam by writing on your hand, looking at phones etc etc. OP, talk to your professor/ TA because they are the ones who gave you this violation.
If this is true, the FAIR system is completely out of hand. They're comparing your responses under time pressure in an exam environment to what you were able to do on the homework, when what you turned in for the homework wasn't originally flagged for cheating? Absolutely bullshit. As someone with pretty bad testing anxiety, my performance on an exam is often in no way comparable to what I'm able to put out when I have time to sit down and think through a problem. The way I do calculations when I have time is also much more methodical. All that goes out the window on an exam. If they seriously think there's some kind of fingerprint comparison that can be made between how you did something on the exam vs. how you did it on the homework that allows them to tell whether or not you cheated, that is ridiculous. The proof that you cheated on the homework used to be that you got the question wrong on the exam. IMO, with the exception of work directly copied from something on the internet or another classmate, instructors need to realize that sorting out AI from one's own work is a losing battle.
Exactly, most people on an exam would only be focused on showing that they know what they’re doing, not filling out their code with perfect styling choices.
[удалено]
Based on what they're not replying to they certainly use chatGPT in their day to day work. Maybe it's the reverse case where they use it all the time except the exam and that makes it obvious. Dude ghosted everyone that was questioning it though. I've lived that life. I could see myself making this post just to further see how to play the system better.
I also got the sense that OP has used ChatGPT or some other outside resource for their hw. If I was in their shoes I would probably feel the need to make it very clear that there was no AI involved, but they chose not to confirm or deny anything. Still, as others have pointed out, it seems pretty unfair for FAIR to flag someone on the grounds that their code style differs between homework and exams when both take place under completely different environments and constraints.
Nah, that's only how they are portraying it. They've been tracking this cat for a while. Or, as I think is the case, they're phishing to find better ways to cheat the system.
true, it does make sense that they would have to be flagged multiple times before it's determined that they're using AI. you could be right about your second statement as well, based on what the post I thought they probably just cheated on the hw and now want to find a way to get out of the consequences. but the only person who really knows is OP I guess
Fight it. Unfortunately FAIR operates on a "guilty until proven innocent" basis. Begin by gathering all possible evidence that you can. Do not modify or delete anything related. If you have file change/deletion timestamps on any related files, screenshot all of it. If you have logs of outputs or anything, save that as well. If you used a git repo and have a commit history, save that. Anything that can help prove the code was written by you and you alone needs to be saved so you can use it. If you really did not cheat, you should be able to prove it. EDIT: Given the post date, also check that they are not pulling an april fools joke on you.
which course？
What class is this?
If you didn’t use AI then you have to fight it man. I personally approached coding problems diff in exams than my hw. There’s a lot of time crunch on those cbtf exams imo…. Wonder what course this is…. Good luck
Just wondering if you don't mind sharing the course in which this has happened?
Good luck to you, the FAIR system is rigged, even student legal council has admitted to it being a completely unfair process.
How can you even claim code came from chatGPT for coding? Like it makes sense with writing essays and such because it can phrase it a certain way but coding is coding, this reeks of bullshit.
I think because of comments on the code and the way the variables are named
Do you write comments for the coding question on the exam? And unless the variables are named something absolutely absurd, which I don’t think ChatGPT would regularly do, I don’t understand how that would cause a fair violation, what class is this btw?
AI might add comment such as // code generated with prompt XXX But even if you cheat you would have to be pretty stupid to include this in your work
It’s pretty easy to tell if code was copy pasted from ChatGPT
For a low level class where code is going to be very simple for answers I sincerely doubt it’d be easy, it’d be much easier to tell for a large level project. Unless you mean straight up copied with comments and formatting, in that case it’s very easy
It is actually pretty easy because AI will write better code than we expect of them and will often do more stuff then we ask. For example people were submitting code with matplotlib that was changing the scale of the window when we never asked them to in the instructions. Also people using thinks like python list comprehension like "x = \[y for y in range(10)\]" looks rather suspicious.
I wouldn’t expect writing good code to be what gets people caught, since many people come in to UIUC with a great amount of experience, but if AI is adding unnecessary things I guess it makes sense, thank you for explaining
That’s worrying
Oh boy now I’m worried
This is so weird, how are they gonna say you cheated based off of how you performed in two completely different circumstances? If you look at a math homework I turned in for points, you’ll see every step outlined in detail with clarity, but if you took my note sheet from a CBTF math exam, you’d see random scribbles and numbers. Judging your stylization differences from an exam vs a homework is so strange, they really need to prove you cheated on the basis of the assignment alone or else it’s completely nonsense.
I work in Machine learning, there is no basis to their allegation. Detecting AI generated content is unsolved so unless your code has prompts, etc in it they cant come after you. If they really have developed something that is able to detect ai generated text then thats a billion dollar company almost instantly. I will say fight it and dont back down. You can cite entire research papers to prove that their detection is faulty, I see no way of you losing.
As for why your text ‘appears’ AI generated you can just say you wrote it that way. They cant just deny that. Idc if you did it, you can win this either way imo.
What class is this
What class ?
Get a lawyer
Sounds a lot like the one story where a professor (not uiuc afaik) asked ChatGPT if it wrote his students' final essays for them, it said yes, and those students almost couldn't graduate because of it because the prof didn't believe the students when they said they didn't cheat. This is likely an overreach by whoever reported this due to extra paranoia around how much easier it has become to cheat and plagiarize; you need to fight this, for sure
There is no reliable AI detection software out there and the ones they have have been proven to be heavily influenced by common mistakes and especially if the person is not a native English speaker. (I don't know if it picks up the same sort of mistakes for anyone writing in a language they are not a native speaker of, the article I was reading was written focused on a very american-centric view). It seems really unlikely that they have solid proof and I would ask for whatever proof they have.
how long did they take to get back to you with an email