Identifying ChatGPT-generated texts in EFL students’ writing: Through comparative analysis of linguistic fingerprints

{"title":"Identifying ChatGPT-generated texts in EFL students’ writing: Through comparative analysis of linguistic fingerprints","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.acorp.2024.100106","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The emergence of generative AI (GenAI) poses new challenges for L2 writing teachers. This study investigates the distinguishability of essays written by Japanese EFL learners from those generated by ChatGPT. Partially replicating Herbold et al. (2023), 140 first-year university students wrote essays and completed a survey on ChatGPT use. Among them, 125 wrote independently, 13 used ChatGPT for proofreading, and two asked ChatGPT to write the entire essay. To create a comparative dataset, 123 additional essays were generated by ChatGPT, imitating the two texts. The resulting 263 essays were then analyzed using the natural language processing (NLP) technique, including automated linguistic analysis and machine learning classification using random forest. The results reveal significant differences between human-written and ChatGPT-generated essays across all linguistic features, with the latter being easily identifiable. This study emphasizes the need for clear guidelines on the ethical use of AI in L2 writing, highlighting the potential risk of inappropriate AI use and the importance of fostering a mutual understanding of AI use with learners regarding responsible AI integration in academic work.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":72254,"journal":{"name":"Applied Corpus Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Corpus Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666799124000236","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The emergence of generative AI (GenAI) poses new challenges for L2 writing teachers. This study investigates the distinguishability of essays written by Japanese EFL learners from those generated by ChatGPT. Partially replicating Herbold et al. (2023), 140 first-year university students wrote essays and completed a survey on ChatGPT use. Among them, 125 wrote independently, 13 used ChatGPT for proofreading, and two asked ChatGPT to write the entire essay. To create a comparative dataset, 123 additional essays were generated by ChatGPT, imitating the two texts. The resulting 263 essays were then analyzed using the natural language processing (NLP) technique, including automated linguistic analysis and machine learning classification using random forest. The results reveal significant differences between human-written and ChatGPT-generated essays across all linguistic features, with the latter being easily identifiable. This study emphasizes the need for clear guidelines on the ethical use of AI in L2 writing, highlighting the potential risk of inappropriate AI use and the importance of fostering a mutual understanding of AI use with learners regarding responsible AI integration in academic work.
识别英语语言学生写作中由 ChatGPT 生成的文本:通过语言指纹的比较分析
生成式人工智能(GenAI)的出现给 L2 写作教师带来了新的挑战。本研究调查了日本 EFL 学习者撰写的文章与 ChatGPT 生成的文章之间的可区分性。部分复制 Herbold 等人(2023 年)的研究,140 名大学一年级学生撰写了文章,并完成了关于 ChatGPT 使用情况的调查。其中,125 人独立写作,13 人使用 ChatGPT 进行校对,2 人要求 ChatGPT 撰写整篇文章。为了创建一个比较数据集,ChatGPT 又模仿这两篇文章生成了 123 篇文章。然后使用自然语言处理(NLP)技术对生成的 263 篇文章进行了分析,包括自动语言分析和使用随机森林的机器学习分类。结果显示,人类撰写的文章与 ChatGPT 生成的文章在所有语言特征上都存在显著差异,后者很容易识别。本研究强调了在 L2 写作中使用人工智能的道德规范,强调了不当使用人工智能的潜在风险,以及与学习者就负责任地将人工智能融入学术工作促进对人工智能使用的相互理解的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Applied Corpus Linguistics
Applied Corpus Linguistics Linguistics and Language
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
70 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信