跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2611.12487 · v1

Detecting AI-Authored Text in Authentic Student Writing: Evidence from PISA 2025

首次提交 2026-11-09 22:36
版本更新 2026-11-09 22:36
雷达观测 2026-11-10 15:22
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

AI-text detectors reach near-perfect scores in evaluations that contrast fully human-written texts with texts generated from researcher-designed prompts. In authentic student writing, however, AI use is voluntary and often partial. We study this setting with the PISA 2025 FLA dataset, in which 15-year-olds in Germany wrote English argumentative essays with and without access to a gpt-4o-mini-based chatbot. Keystroke, clipboard and chat logs let us trace every character of the final essay to its origin. From this provenance, we derive text- and sentence-level labels for human-written, AI-generated and mixed text, and for text written after chatbot use without traceable AI material. We evaluate a feature-based detector and a classifier on frozen Llama-3.1-8B embeddings, both adapted from top-ranked shared-task systems. Both separate AI from human text reliably (macro-F1 up to 0.96 for texts and 0.95 for sentences), independently of spelling errors. The feature-based detector, however, relies on lexical complexity, which a simple student-style rewriting prompt removes (AI recall 0.92 $\to$ 0.60 with gpt-4o-mini, 0.41 with Qwen3). The embedding-based detector stays robust for whole texts (AI recall $\geq$ 0.94) but not for single sentences (AI recall as low as 0.59). Mixed text falls between the two classes, and text without traceable AI material is classified as human-written in about 95\% of texts.

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v1 · 2026-11-09 22:36 · 最新观测版本

Detecting AI-Authored Text in Authentic Student Writing: Evidence from PISA 2025

AI-text detectors reach near-perfect scores in evaluations that contrast fully human-written texts with texts generated from researcher-designed prompts. In authentic student writing, however, AI use is voluntary and often partial. We study this setting with the PISA 2025 FLA dataset, in which 15-year-olds in Germany wrote English argumentative essays with and without access to a gpt-4o-mini-based chatbot. Keystroke, clipboard and chat logs let us trace every character of the final essay to its origin. From this provenance, we derive text- and sentence-level labels for human-written, AI-generated and mixed text, and for text written after chatbot use without traceable AI material. We evaluate a feature-based detector and a classifier on frozen Llama-3.1-8B embeddings, both adapted from top-ranked shared-task systems. Both separate AI from human text reliably (macro-F1 up to 0.96 for texts and 0.95 for sentences), independently of spelling errors. The feature-based detector, however, relies on lexical complexity, which a simple student-style rewriting prompt removes (AI recall 0.92 $\to$ 0.60 with gpt-4o-mini, 0.41 with Qwen3). The embedding-based detector stays robust for whole texts (AI recall $\geq$ 0.94) but not for single sentences (AI recall as low as 0.59). Mixed text falls between the two classes, and text without traceable AI material is classified as human-written in about 95\% of texts.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗