arbiter
JournalsAccount

Heads we win, tails you lose: AI detectors in education

Mark Andrew Bassett et al.

Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management2026https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080x.2026.2622146article
AJG 1ABDC B
Weight
0.37

Abstract

The increasing use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) in student assessment has led to institutional reliance on detection tools. Unlike plagiarism detection, AI detection relies on unverifiable probabilistic estimates. In this paper, we argue that generative AI detection should not be used in education due to its methodological imperfections, violation of procedural fairness, and unverifiable outputs. Generative AI detectors cannot be tested in real-world conditions where the true origin of a text is unknown. Attempts to validate results through linguistic markers, multiple tools, or comparisons with past work introduce confirmation bias rather than independent verification. Moreover, categorising text as human- or AI-generated imposes a false dichotomy that ignores work created with, not by, AI. Generative AI detection also raises security concerns. Academic integrity investigations must rely on evidence meeting the balance of probabilities standard, which generative AI detection scores do not satisfy.

1 citation

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080x.2026.2622146

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{mark2026,
  title        = {{Heads we win, tails you lose: AI detectors in education}},
  author       = {Mark Andrew Bassett et al.},
  journal      = {Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080x.2026.2622146},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Heads we win, tails you lose: AI detectors in education

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.37

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.16 × 0.4 = 0.06
M · momentum0.53 × 0.15 = 0.08
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.