Cited by 6Academic integrity and plagiarismAuthorship Attribution and ProfilingArtificial Intelligence in Education

Detection of artificial intelligence-generated essays for academic assessment integrity using large language models

Qorich, Mohammed, El Ouazzani, Rajae·2025·Expert Systems with Applications

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.eswa.2025.128405

Cites

84 of 84 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • AI-assisted assessments may create an unfair academic playing field by benefiting students with better access to AI tools and technology while disadvantaging those from underprivileged backgrounds.

    “Additionally, AI-assisted assessments may create an unfair academic playing field by benefiting students with better access to AI tools and technology while disadvantag -ing those from underprivileged backgrounds [ 62, 64, 97].”
  • Institutions have shifted toward alternative assessment methods, such as oral exams (viva voce), real-world reflective tasks, scaffolded assignments, reflective journals, Bloom's Taxonomy higher-order thinking questions, and interactive problem-solving tasks, which require direct student engagement and cannot be easily outsourced to AI.

    “To achieve this, institutions have shifted toward alternative assessment methods, such as oral exams (viva voce), real-world reflective tasks, scaffolded assignments, reflective journals, use of Bloom's Taxonomy higher-order thinking questions, and interactive problemsolving tasks, which require direct student engagement and cannot be easily outsourced to AI [ 56, 65, 67, 70, 73, 79, 89, 94, 97-99”
  • Reliance on AI for tasks requiring cognitive engagement results in declining independent reasoning, writing abilities, critical thinking, and analytical skills, making students less prepared for real-world problem-solving.

    “The reliance on AI for tasks requiring cognitive engagement results in declining independent reasoning, writing abilities, critical thinking, and analytical skills, making students less prepared for realworld problem-solving scenarios [ 60, 72, 93, 97, 98].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 86 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Qorich, M., & El Ouazzani, R.
Affiliations
Université Moulay Ismail de Meknes (MA)
Corresponding author
Qorich, Mohammed
Venue
Expert Systems with Applications
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2025-10
Volume
291
Pages
128405
ISSN
0957-4174 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4410910662
Cited by
6
References
86
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 2
FWCI
6.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Expert Systems with Applications (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Academic integrity and plagiarism
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Authorship Attribution and Profiling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
Keywords
AI-generated text detection, academic integrity, generative AI in education, plagiarism detection, large language models, BART, CNN classifier, hyperparameter optimization, ChatGPT, GPT-2, RoBERTa

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review