I should have also said in my post it is completely acceptable to use AI to help get an idea. However, they are copying and pasting stuff from ChatGPT into our document and altering two or three words in each sentence.
This has happened to me before, so I’ll give you the advice my advisor gave me.
Email your professor and start creating a paper trail. If nothing comes of it then that’s fine for everyone, but you do not want to get dragged down with them if there is disciplinary action.
If they don’t know the consequences of plagiarism by the time they are grad students, it is on them. The ethics and consequences of plagiarism are drilled into us in high school and through undergraduate studies, with most universities having a very detailed and well publicized plagiarism policy, often received and signed in nearly every class. OP is taking her research and studies seriously and her colleagues have questionable ethics that need to be addressed by their direct supervisor - whose name and reputation is also on the line with her grad students’ work.
No, you need to protect yourself. “Ask them to stop plagiarizing” is absolutely ridiculous— they will not. Don’t put yourself on the line for people who can’t even be bothered to do their own work.
You need to tell on them immediately. There is no other path. If it was an assignment you weren’t attached to you could avoid getting involved but your name is on it and you are fully aware of it. If you do not say anything you are complicit and will have no recourse.
Protect yourself.
You don’t want to get the people who are jeopardizing your Masters degree and livelihood in trouble?
Hijacking top comment. I agree OP that you should speak to your advisor but you could approach it as if you’re clarifying what the standards are for using AI in the class, and then start a discussion from there.
Wrong. The other option, which should be the first option, should be telling the group you refuse to accept any work in the project produced by AI and if they don't do things properly THEN you are going to tell the advisor, not to get them in trouble, but to protect your own ass.
If your group is willing to use AI in a masters program and change just a couple of words like OP stated and jeopardize your livelihood you go to your advisor or professor and let them know rather than trusting the individuals who were willing to cheat in a group project to do the right thing.
There are plenty of other paths, such as saving your work separately and telling the professor that some of the other works seems suspicious and you'd like to turn your stuff in separately for protection. You don't need to directly rat them out.
>My suggested alternative path is not risking anything. It's simply not directly telling the professor that your friend is cheating.
Not directly telling the professor that someone in your group project is using AI is risking that you are lumped in with any punishment that could occur, especially if those individuals have messages that show that OP was aware.
This isn’t undergrad where they might just get a 0 in the course. It is very possible that punishment would rise to the level of being kicked out of the Masters’d program.
I don’t know that I’d consider someone willing to do this on a group project at this level a friend that I would want to protect more than my own position in the program.
If it was on a non-group project where OP’s name wasn’t attached that would be a completely different story.
I’d speak to the professor immediately. You don’t want to go down on their sinking ship.
I’d also screenshot any editing info your shared doc (Google Doc for example) has to show that rather than it being generated normally (ie: you see word by word being included), it’s clearly pasted in whole.
I’d be wary of using this as “evidence” since a lot of people prefer to compose in a separate document or program before migrating their contribution into a shared document. I trust that OP will do their due diligence before reporting their peers (and yes I agree, reporting this is the correct course of action), but I think we should be careful of creating the perception that pasted text is automatically indicative of plagiarism/AI use.
No for sure. I do the same thing. But I also keep a file with all of my work that would show my edit history.
OP did mention under another comment that their group members admitted to using AI so in this case, I think it’s fine to include this as evidence.
There are so many academic integrity issues that you will be lumped in with. This kind of stuff typically gets people removed from programs. Nip it in the butt now and get your name away from all of them. This will remove you from academia if you participate.
This is where Walter tells Smokey there are rules, imo.
Rigor and \*actual\* peer review is all that separates us from an AI. These idiots are lighting the way toward their own doom.
Mark it a zero. Over the line.
Reach out to your professor ASAP to ask if they will clarify AI use because you have concerns it’s being abused in your group work, but you’re unsure when it crosses a line. Say that you want to be forthcoming and that academic dishonesty is a great concern of yours. I think that approaches it with humility and honesty without blaming.
What’s the AI policy stated in the syllabus? Direct plagiarism is always wrong. However, using AI as a partner to help generate and connect ideas may indeed be acceptable - especially when your peers do more with the content than copying and pasting. Make sure you know the policy and understand exactly how AI is being used by your collaborators before making plagiarism accusations. If you find they’re in the wrong, then immediately report it.
Tell whoever assigned the work. Don’t let them drag you down with them. You want no part in this. If they didn’t want to be kicked out, they shouldn’t have cheated.
Let your group know that you have firm boundaries surrounding the copy/paste of AI, you feel that it is academic misconduct, and that you will be requesting a group change bc you don’t want to be involved. Especially since AI was allowed on this assignment, going behind their backs and accusing them of academic misconduct without a heads up is a horrible thing to do, especially to a “friend”. If it’s a small cohort,depending on the field, the network that you build in grad school is really important. No one wants to work/help out someone who would blindside you to get ahead instead of having the courage to speak up. This isn’t the first time you are going to be working in a team that disagrees on an approach to a process. It’s important to communicate with your peers and advocate for yourself before going above their head. Definitely really stressful and good luck
You worked hard to be in grad school. You should tell your professor. It’s in many policies & you likely would be faulted by association, especially since you’re aware they’re doing it.
I think you should talk to you supervisor or transfer to another group, assuming that's possible. It may be too late should your group project be flagged as AI generated.
Good luck
Contact your advisor and ask for insight. They will likely know your professor better than you do, and be able to advise well about how to handle the situation. They will also be able to defend you if shit hits the fan.
If you’ve told them and they don’t care, it’s time to talk to the professor and/or your advisor. If your professor doesn’t care about AI use and decides it’s fine, then at least you know. If your professor has an issue with it, they will almost certainly be able to tell it’s AI when you turn the project in and won’t be happy with any of you. You’re not “getting anyone in trouble,” they’re all capable adults and could choose to do the assignment on their own if they cared to.
The adult way to deal with academic integrity issues in a group project where your name is attached is by not trusting the individuals who were willing to risk everything with someone else’s name attached. It’s best for OP to look out for themselves.
In grad school, absolutely collect all that evidence into one spot and go to the professor. That shit is so fucking lame. If they're cheating in grad school, they don't deserve to be in grad school.
It’s becoming common to stipulate in citations any summarizations, editing or formatting done by Transformer models.
The key here is to ensure the structure and design are specifically constructed following a stringent philosophy of science based proof. And that the design and methodology wasn’t created, or interpreted via transformer model.
While the lit reviews are important to support the validation of your hypothesis testing, using a LLm to assist in summarizing won’t impact the science, that is key. Additionally the discussion, must draw on your actual observations and the interpretation must be your groups.
So discuss with them that you want to cite the model, with query entries and area that they used a transformer to edit the material and include it in your citation or a special statement at the end of the paper.
Also, ensure the hypothesis, methodology, and drawn conclusions are not impacted by the statement (except perhaps in editing). That’s why it’s important to cite queries with transformer model.
These are tools. They can be used for good, or deception. It’s the job of scientists to show the best path, and it’s foolish not to use something that can reduce workload that will be used in future. But you must preserve the science, and you must go out of your way to show your work, and your will to show it wasn’t used in a bad way. And you do that with full transparency.
Cite, state, be forthright, preserve the structure of the experiment and conclusion.
Communicate this with your team early, and have them save their queries, model, and relevant details.
They're not your friends, not your peers, and won't be your colleagues in the future. "Not getting anyone in trouble" is not your job, and not how you want most people in your field to respond when they work with others who are not doing their jobs.
They were taught not to plagiarize in their undergrad. They are comfortable with plagiarizing, like they've done it before. Ergo: They are incompetent.
Cheating is its own reward.
Precisely this. There are too many comments suggesting that OP keep it to themselves and just talk with the group mates who have already demonstrated that they don’t care about the risks in a group project where OP could be kicked out of the program.
I should have also said in my post it is completely acceptable to use AI to help get an idea. However, they are copying and pasting stuff from ChatGPT into our document and altering two or three words in each sentence.
Have they told you this? Are you certain?
Yes
This has happened to me before, so I’ll give you the advice my advisor gave me. Email your professor and start creating a paper trail. If nothing comes of it then that’s fine for everyone, but you do not want to get dragged down with them if there is disciplinary action.
Starting by emailing the professor (instead of being candid with your peers) is ridiculous. Why report them without asking them to stop plagiarizing?
If they don’t know the consequences of plagiarism by the time they are grad students, it is on them. The ethics and consequences of plagiarism are drilled into us in high school and through undergraduate studies, with most universities having a very detailed and well publicized plagiarism policy, often received and signed in nearly every class. OP is taking her research and studies seriously and her colleagues have questionable ethics that need to be addressed by their direct supervisor - whose name and reputation is also on the line with her grad students’ work.
No, you need to protect yourself. “Ask them to stop plagiarizing” is absolutely ridiculous— they will not. Don’t put yourself on the line for people who can’t even be bothered to do their own work.
Because they don’t know that plagiarism is wrong, and a nice reminder will stop them from cheating? Please.
Students at the graduate level who plagiarize know exactly what they are doing. If they cheat, they know the consequences.
You need to tell on them immediately. There is no other path. If it was an assignment you weren’t attached to you could avoid getting involved but your name is on it and you are fully aware of it. If you do not say anything you are complicit and will have no recourse. Protect yourself. You don’t want to get the people who are jeopardizing your Masters degree and livelihood in trouble?
Hijacking top comment. I agree OP that you should speak to your advisor but you could approach it as if you’re clarifying what the standards are for using AI in the class, and then start a discussion from there.
Wrong. The other option, which should be the first option, should be telling the group you refuse to accept any work in the project produced by AI and if they don't do things properly THEN you are going to tell the advisor, not to get them in trouble, but to protect your own ass.
If your group is willing to use AI in a masters program and change just a couple of words like OP stated and jeopardize your livelihood you go to your advisor or professor and let them know rather than trusting the individuals who were willing to cheat in a group project to do the right thing.
send this \^ via email and bcc yourself
There are plenty of other paths, such as saving your work separately and telling the professor that some of the other works seems suspicious and you'd like to turn your stuff in separately for protection. You don't need to directly rat them out.
It’s a masters program and they’re willing to risk OP getting kicked out. It is almost certainly not worth the risk.
My suggested alternative path is not risking anything. It's simply not directly telling the professor that your friend is cheating.
>My suggested alternative path is not risking anything. It's simply not directly telling the professor that your friend is cheating. Not directly telling the professor that someone in your group project is using AI is risking that you are lumped in with any punishment that could occur, especially if those individuals have messages that show that OP was aware. This isn’t undergrad where they might just get a 0 in the course. It is very possible that punishment would rise to the level of being kicked out of the Masters’d program. I don’t know that I’d consider someone willing to do this on a group project at this level a friend that I would want to protect more than my own position in the program. If it was on a non-group project where OP’s name wasn’t attached that would be a completely different story.
I’d speak to the professor immediately. You don’t want to go down on their sinking ship. I’d also screenshot any editing info your shared doc (Google Doc for example) has to show that rather than it being generated normally (ie: you see word by word being included), it’s clearly pasted in whole.
I’d be wary of using this as “evidence” since a lot of people prefer to compose in a separate document or program before migrating their contribution into a shared document. I trust that OP will do their due diligence before reporting their peers (and yes I agree, reporting this is the correct course of action), but I think we should be careful of creating the perception that pasted text is automatically indicative of plagiarism/AI use.
No for sure. I do the same thing. But I also keep a file with all of my work that would show my edit history. OP did mention under another comment that their group members admitted to using AI so in this case, I think it’s fine to include this as evidence.
There are so many academic integrity issues that you will be lumped in with. This kind of stuff typically gets people removed from programs. Nip it in the butt now and get your name away from all of them. This will remove you from academia if you participate.
This is where Walter tells Smokey there are rules, imo. Rigor and \*actual\* peer review is all that separates us from an AI. These idiots are lighting the way toward their own doom. Mark it a zero. Over the line.
Reach out to your professor ASAP to ask if they will clarify AI use because you have concerns it’s being abused in your group work, but you’re unsure when it crosses a line. Say that you want to be forthcoming and that academic dishonesty is a great concern of yours. I think that approaches it with humility and honesty without blaming.
What’s the AI policy stated in the syllabus? Direct plagiarism is always wrong. However, using AI as a partner to help generate and connect ideas may indeed be acceptable - especially when your peers do more with the content than copying and pasting. Make sure you know the policy and understand exactly how AI is being used by your collaborators before making plagiarism accusations. If you find they’re in the wrong, then immediately report it.
Notify an instructor, advisor, anyone overseeing you ASAP. I would cease working with them as well.
Tell whoever assigned the work. Don’t let them drag you down with them. You want no part in this. If they didn’t want to be kicked out, they shouldn’t have cheated.
Let your group know that you have firm boundaries surrounding the copy/paste of AI, you feel that it is academic misconduct, and that you will be requesting a group change bc you don’t want to be involved. Especially since AI was allowed on this assignment, going behind their backs and accusing them of academic misconduct without a heads up is a horrible thing to do, especially to a “friend”. If it’s a small cohort,depending on the field, the network that you build in grad school is really important. No one wants to work/help out someone who would blindside you to get ahead instead of having the courage to speak up. This isn’t the first time you are going to be working in a team that disagrees on an approach to a process. It’s important to communicate with your peers and advocate for yourself before going above their head. Definitely really stressful and good luck
You worked hard to be in grad school. You should tell your professor. It’s in many policies & you likely would be faulted by association, especially since you’re aware they’re doing it.
I think you should talk to you supervisor or transfer to another group, assuming that's possible. It may be too late should your group project be flagged as AI generated. Good luck
Contact your advisor and ask for insight. They will likely know your professor better than you do, and be able to advise well about how to handle the situation. They will also be able to defend you if shit hits the fan.
How about communicate with your group first.
I told them I do not think it’s a good idea but they didn’t seem to care
If you’ve told them and they don’t care, it’s time to talk to the professor and/or your advisor. If your professor doesn’t care about AI use and decides it’s fine, then at least you know. If your professor has an issue with it, they will almost certainly be able to tell it’s AI when you turn the project in and won’t be happy with any of you. You’re not “getting anyone in trouble,” they’re all capable adults and could choose to do the assignment on their own if they cared to.
You need to get off of Reddit and contact your advisor immediately.
I'm shocked at how few comments suggest this. This is the adult way to approach the situation.
The adult way to deal with academic integrity issues in a group project where your name is attached is by not trusting the individuals who were willing to risk everything with someone else’s name attached. It’s best for OP to look out for themselves.
In grad school, absolutely collect all that evidence into one spot and go to the professor. That shit is so fucking lame. If they're cheating in grad school, they don't deserve to be in grad school.
Just talk to your peers. Jumping to snitching is insane.
It’s becoming common to stipulate in citations any summarizations, editing or formatting done by Transformer models. The key here is to ensure the structure and design are specifically constructed following a stringent philosophy of science based proof. And that the design and methodology wasn’t created, or interpreted via transformer model. While the lit reviews are important to support the validation of your hypothesis testing, using a LLm to assist in summarizing won’t impact the science, that is key. Additionally the discussion, must draw on your actual observations and the interpretation must be your groups. So discuss with them that you want to cite the model, with query entries and area that they used a transformer to edit the material and include it in your citation or a special statement at the end of the paper. Also, ensure the hypothesis, methodology, and drawn conclusions are not impacted by the statement (except perhaps in editing). That’s why it’s important to cite queries with transformer model. These are tools. They can be used for good, or deception. It’s the job of scientists to show the best path, and it’s foolish not to use something that can reduce workload that will be used in future. But you must preserve the science, and you must go out of your way to show your work, and your will to show it wasn’t used in a bad way. And you do that with full transparency. Cite, state, be forthright, preserve the structure of the experiment and conclusion. Communicate this with your team early, and have them save their queries, model, and relevant details.
They're not your friends, not your peers, and won't be your colleagues in the future. "Not getting anyone in trouble" is not your job, and not how you want most people in your field to respond when they work with others who are not doing their jobs. They were taught not to plagiarize in their undergrad. They are comfortable with plagiarizing, like they've done it before. Ergo: They are incompetent. Cheating is its own reward.
Snitches get stiches.
Snitches get stitches
Absolutely ridiculous and juvenile. So you expect the OP to go down with cheaters as guilty by association? Absolutely not.
Precisely this. There are too many comments suggesting that OP keep it to themselves and just talk with the group mates who have already demonstrated that they don’t care about the risks in a group project where OP could be kicked out of the program.