Well with VC investment low due to higher interest rates it was only a matter of time before academic people started posting bullshit papers to lure that sweet sweet VC money.
Seems like a few people at the University of Kansas in Lawrence are making a run at a start up.
No references whatsoever to false positive rates, which I’d assume are quite high. Also, they single out that they built this detector to catch chemistry-related AI-generated articles
they still can’t capture data written from Ai over websites like ’ https://themixnews.com/’ https://themixnews.com/cj-amos-height-age-brother/
I really really doubt this, openai said recently that ai detectors are pretty much impossible. And in the article they literally use the wrong name to refer to a different AI detector.
Especially when you can change Chatgpt’s style by just asking it to write in a more casual way, “stylometrics” seems to be an improbable method for detecting ai as well.
It’s in openai’s best interests to say they’re impossible. Completely regardless of the truth of if they are, that’s the least trustworthy possible source to take into account when forming your understanding of this.
Isn’t current precedent 0% accuracy already?
If you have 0% accuracy in a binary decision, you could just always choose the other option and be right 100% of the time.
