• RBG@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    3 months ago

    “A 99.9% accurate ChatGPT AI text detector? At this time of year! At this time of day! In this part of the country! Localized entirely within your company?!?”

    “Yes”

    "May I see it?“

    “No”

  • Cyteseer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    3 months ago

    If they aren’t willing to release it, then the situation is no different from them not having one at all. All these claims openai makes about having whatever system but hiding it, is just tobtry and increase hype to grab more investor money.

  • Alphane Moon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    Given a sufficient amount of text, the method is said to be 99.9 percent effective.

    If that’s really the case, they should release some benchmarks. I am skeptical. Promising the world is a key component of their “business model”.

  • Naich@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Total coincidence that this “news” appears about a day after several articles saying the AI bubble is starting to burst.

  • DrCataclysm@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    The detection rate is worthless, an algorithm that says anything is Chatgpt would have a detection rate of 100%. What would be more interesting than that is the false positive rate but they never talk about that.

    • JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      The detector provides an assessment of how likely it is that all or part of the document was written by ChatGPT. Given a sufficient amount of text, the method is said to be 99.9 percent effective.

      That means given 100 pieces of text and asked if they are made by ChatGPT or not, it gets maybe one of them wrong. Allegedly, that is, and with the caveat of “sufficient amount of text”, whatever that means.

    • PenisDuckCuck9001@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      My unpopular opinion is when they’re assigning well beyond 40 hours per week of homework, cheating is no longer unethical. Employers want universities to get students used to working long hours.

  • chiisana@lemmy.chiisana.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    They’re keeping everything anyway, so what’s preventing them from doing a DB look up to see if it (given a large enough passage of text) exist in their output history?

    • _edge@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      I believe the actual detector is similar. They know what sentences are likely generated by chatgpt, since that’s literally in their model. They probably also have to some degree reverse engineered typical output from competing models.