Core Viewpoint - The increasing capability of AI-generated content has led universities to implement strict measures for detecting AI usage in student theses, raising concerns about the reliability of such detection systems and the potential for misjudgment in evaluating original work [1][5]. Group 1: AI Detection Issues - Some universities require that students' theses have an AI detection rate below 15%, but there are reports of original work being flagged as having a high AI rate due to inconsistencies in detection results [1][4]. - A case was reported where a student's thesis showed a significant fluctuation in AI detection rates within a day, from 10.37% to 27.54%, leading to additional costs for revisions [1][2]. - A professor experienced similar issues, where content developed over three years was incorrectly flagged as AI-generated, highlighting the inadequacy of current detection tools [3][4]. Group 2: Expert Opinions - Experts acknowledge that misjudgments in AI detection are common and that the technology cannot completely eliminate errors, as it may not be trained on specific contexts [5]. - The standards for determining whether a paper is AI-generated remain vague, making it challenging for detection systems to accurately assess originality [5]. - Recommendations suggest that universities should not enforce AI detection as a mandatory graduation requirement but rather focus on guiding students in the appropriate use of AI tools [5].

Core Viewpoint - The introduction of AIGC detection tools in universities to identify AI-generated content in graduation theses has led to significant frustration among students, as the tools often misidentify human-written content as AI-generated and vice versa [1][2][16]. Group 1: AIGC Detection Tools - Many universities have implemented AIGC detection to prevent students from using AI to write their theses, causing confusion and anxiety among students [1][2]. - Students have reported that their own writing is often flagged as AI-generated due to its professional tone, while actual AI-generated content may not be detected [2][4]. - The detection tools are powered by AI themselves, leading to a paradox where AI is used to identify AI-generated text [7][22]. Group 2: Accuracy and Reliability - The accuracy of these detection tools is questionable, with some tools having a detection accuracy as low as 26%, and even misclassifying classic literature as AI-generated [19][22]. - The detection process analyzes various linguistic features and compares them to AI writing patterns, but this method is not foolproof and can lead to erroneous conclusions [17][22]. - Different detection websites yield varying results for the same text, creating further confusion for students who are trying to ensure their work meets academic standards [26][28]. Group 3: Implications for Students - The requirement for AIGC detection adds financial burdens on students, as they must pay for these services in addition to traditional plagiarism checks [25][28]. - The focus on AI detection may detract from the actual quality and authenticity of the content, as students feel pressured to alter their writing styles to avoid detection [22][36]. - The educational goal of assessing students' understanding and problem-solving abilities may be undermined by an overemphasis on AI detection [30][31].