The answer to that is not as simple as it may seem, especially when it comes to academic texts. Nowadays, a significant portion of students utilize various forms of AI in their learning. In this article, we will explore the core differences between bot or human texts in academia to try to answer this question.
A traditional solution for many years has been the assistance of professional writers. Reliable services like EssayPro have been operating in this field for years. They offer an option to partner with an author to work on the text. However, the availability of AI has changed the game.
Nowadays, many students utilize solutions like ChatGPT or Jasper to generate texts. Unsurprisingly, colleges and professors are opposed to this, as it undermines the integrity of scholarly work.
Yet, it became a popular solution since it's fast and affordable. The spread of generated content is so overwhelming that it can be hard to understand, is this human or AI text?
Here are some ways to tell if the text is not human-written:
+ One of the easiest ways is to use one of the free online checkers.
+ On your own, you should pay attention to the structure and headings (Are they created in the same fashion that makes them sound almost identical?)
+ The text is very dry, lacks any emotion and repeats a lot of the things it has already discussed.
+ If the facts seem vague or far-fetched, there is a high probability they're not real and were created by AI.
+ Some of the links lead to non-existent pages, or text refers to fictional research.
In academic texts, the manual distinction can be quite hard because there are rigorous rules regarding structure, wording, and tone of voice. However, an experienced reader (professor or editor) will spot the difference easily.
Summing up, AI is fast and consistent. It deals pretty well with the structure and logic of an academic assignment.
These issues come not only from the technology being imperfect in the current stage of development. They also have to do with the way such solutions work. They are trained on a large pool of existing texts. The answers presented are a compilation of those datasets.
AI lacks critical thinking and emotional intelligence. It doesn't come up with creative ideas. It can only synthesize something based on the information given. It cannot come up with an innovative approach or a new perspective on the matter. It also lacks understanding of the broader context and nuance of any problem. Basically, it doesn't have human experience, and it is the biggest problem.
One might say that, for instance, emotion has no place in academia. However, it is not true. Take a reflective essay as an example. A bit cannot reflect on a human experience or analyze the emotion. Even if the text is scholarly in nature, it still relies on understanding and feeling emotions.
That's why it's often easy to answer the question, "Is this AI or human text?" while reading it for only a couple of minutes.
So, the main downsides of the AI to human text approach are:
+ The results will be as good and as reliable as the source texts. If there was a bias there, it would transfer to the generated one.
+ There are plenty of duplicate and repetitive sentences. They add volume, not value.
+ There is no creativity. AI does not create - it compiles data based on the previously-learned sources.
+ It often relies on older research than a human expert. The data can be outdated and unreliable.
+ It can and will sometimes make up fake data and research.
+ It often misinterprets even the accurate data.
+ It lacks fact-checking. There were multiple instances where AI provided incorrect answers to the simplest questions.
+ It is easy to detect. The consequences can be very severe, up to being expelled from the educational institution.
When it comes to reliability and value, an AI or human text debacle is simple. So far, the technology has not been able to compete with human professionals.
The pros of a human text are:
+ Understanding of the most intricate contextual nuances;
+ Emotional input and personal reflection;
+ Creative approach and fresh perspective;
+ Actually valuable insights into the subject;
+ Critical thinking and great research;
+ Fact-checking and reliable data;
+ Undetectable by an AI or human text checker.
Humans are still much more efficient when it comes to creativity, insightfulness, innovation, and research. Yes, such work takes time and is more expensive, but it is easy to see why. It is all about quality.
However, there are some cons to this option, too, namely:
+ It is time-consuming. No human will create an essay in two minutes.
+ It costs more than a free app.
+ There could be risks if you work with unreliable authors. Therefore, students should use only credible platforms.
Yet, when you read a piece created with individual attention and care, there should be no questions about its nature, no question of is it AI or human text. You'll spot the difference right away.
Since it has no human experience or intent, it cannot generate a new perspective or fresh idea. It can only repeat what it has been taught. It also doesn't take feedback as well as it should. For these reasons, human writing remains essential where depth, originality, and ethical judgment are required.
Related Links
Space Technology News - Applications and Research
| Subscribe Free To Our Daily Newsletters |
| Subscribe Free To Our Daily Newsletters |
