Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Published: |
2026
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.20254 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1866917355294031872 |
|---|---|
| author | Garland, Nathan |
| author_facet | Garland, Nathan |
| contents | Student experiences and empirical studies report that "black box" AI text detectors produce high false positive rates with disproportionate errors against certain student populations, yet typically theoretical analyses model detection as a test between two known distributions for human and AI prose. This framing omits the structural feature of university assessment whereby an assessor generally does not know the individual student's writing distribution, making the null hypothesis composite. Standard application of the variational characterisation of total variation distance to this composite null shows trade-off bounds that any text-only, one-shot detector with useful power must produce false accusations at a rate governed by the distributional overlap between student writing and AI output. This is a constraint arising from population diversity that is logically independent of AI model quality and cannot be overcome by better detector engineering or technology. A subgroup mixture bound connects these quantities to observable demographic groups, providing a theoretical basis for the disparate impact patterns documented empirically. We propose suggestions to improve policy and practice, and argue that detection scores should not serve as sole evidence in misconduct proceedings. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2603_20254 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2026 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | AI Detectors Fail Diverse Student Populations: A Mathematical Framing of Structural Detection Limits Garland, Nathan Computers and Society Artificial Intelligence Other Statistics Student experiences and empirical studies report that "black box" AI text detectors produce high false positive rates with disproportionate errors against certain student populations, yet typically theoretical analyses model detection as a test between two known distributions for human and AI prose. This framing omits the structural feature of university assessment whereby an assessor generally does not know the individual student's writing distribution, making the null hypothesis composite. Standard application of the variational characterisation of total variation distance to this composite null shows trade-off bounds that any text-only, one-shot detector with useful power must produce false accusations at a rate governed by the distributional overlap between student writing and AI output. This is a constraint arising from population diversity that is logically independent of AI model quality and cannot be overcome by better detector engineering or technology. A subgroup mixture bound connects these quantities to observable demographic groups, providing a theoretical basis for the disparate impact patterns documented empirically. We propose suggestions to improve policy and practice, and argue that detection scores should not serve as sole evidence in misconduct proceedings. |
| title | AI Detectors Fail Diverse Student Populations: A Mathematical Framing of Structural Detection Limits |
| topic | Computers and Society Artificial Intelligence Other Statistics |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.20254 |