The Double-Edged Sword of AI Text Generators: Enhancing Productivity at the Cost of Intellectual Authenticity?

Introduction: Revolutionary Tools or Threats to Creativity

?Artificial intelligence (AI) has rapidly transformed various sectors, and education is no exception. AI has been increasingly integrated into educational systems in recent years, presenting opportunities and challenges. AI helps tailor learning experiences to individual student's needs and abilities, improving their engagement and motivation (Dum, 2020).

It can automate grading, freeing up instructors' time and reducing subjective bias (Baker & Moore, 2022). It is used to continuously evaluate student performance and adjust assessment questions based on their responses, providing a more accurate measure of their knowledge and skills (Chen et al., 2023). It facilitates the creation of immersive virtual learning environments that simulate real-world situations, enhancing students' interactive learning experience (Hsin et al., 2020).

Researchers have reported challenges of AI in Education. AI algorithms have the potential to sustain biases inherent in the training data, resulting in inequitable treatment of specific student cohorts (Eubanks, 2020). The collection and storage of student data raise privacy concerns, potentially exposing sensitive information to unauthorized parties (Gasser, 2022). Over-reliance on AI might diminish “critical thinking and problem-solving skills”. It limits teachers' autonomy in the classroom (Knezek & Christensen, 2023). AI implementation might exacerbate the issue of teacher shortages, especially if AI replaces human educators altogether (Levin & Wilmer, 2020).

?Artificial Intelligence (AI) has revolutionized all spheres of our life, including education, healthcare, and business. One of its most significant applications is in natural language processing (NLP), specifically in generating human-like texts, and machine-learning techniques. AI text generators have gained immense popularity recently due to their ability to produce high-quality content quickly and efficiently (Bozkurt & Sharma, 2023a). AI text generators refer to computer programs that use artificial intelligence (AI) to generate human-like text based on a given prompt, topic, or input (Bozkurt & Sharma, 2023b). However, the increasing reliance on these tools has raised concerns regarding their impact on intellectual authenticity. There are positive powers and negative aspects of AI text generators. Let us examine whether the enhanced productivity through AI Text Generators justifies the potential loss of intellectual authenticity.

?There are several types of AI text generators, including:

1. Language models: These models employ statistical techniques to anticipate the subsequent word within a text sequence based on preceding words. They are trainable using extensive text datasets and can produce novel text resembling the training data. Language models include Recurrent Neural Networks (RNNs) and Transformers (Karita et al., 2019).
2. Text summarization algorithms: These algorithms use AI to condense a large amount of text into a shorter summary. They can extract key points from articles, documents, or other texts. Latent Semantic Analysis (LSA) is a case of text summarization algorithms (Gong & Liu, 2001; Steinberger &? Jezek, 2004; Ozsoy, 2011).
3. Word embeddings: These represent dense vectors of words that encapsulate their semantic significance. Word embeddings can generate new words that are similar in meaning to a given word. Examples of word embedding techniques include Word2Vec and GloVe (Mikolov et al., 2013).
4. Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs): These deep learning architectures comprise two primary elements: a generator and a discriminator. The generator is responsible for producing novel text content, whereas the discriminator assesses the generated text and furnishes constructive input to the generator. GANs can generate new text similar in style and structure to a given dataset (Goodfellow et al., 2014; Creswell et al., 2018).

AI text generators have the potential to revolutionize many industries, such as customer service, marketing, and journalism, by allowing for faster and more efficient content generation. Nonetheless, it is essential to contemplate the ethical consequences of using these technologies, including the fallout of spreading misinformation and its effects on employment.

Positive Powers of AI Text Generators

?AI text generators can process vast amounts of data and generate texts at incredible speeds, making them ideal for content creation, report writing, and summarization tasks. According to a study by (Brynjolfsson et al., 2018), using AI technology in the workplace can increase productivity and efficiency. Consistency in tone, style, and format is another positive power of AI text generators, ensuring that all content meets predetermined standards. They can detect and correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors, resulting in more accurate texts (Hovy & Lischke, 2012). AI text generators offer users creative freedom, allowing them to experiment with different styles, genres, and ideas. They can also assist writers in overcoming writer's block and developing new storylines (Kirby & Pullum, 2017).

??Negative Aspects of AI Text Generators

?The primary criticism leveled against AI text generators is their lack of originality. Since these tools rely on existing texts and patterns, they often produce predictable and formulaic content (Miller, 2018). Moreover, the generated texts may contain plagiaristic elements, which can be detrimental to academic integrity (Liu & Liu, 2018). Excessive dependence on AI text generators can impede the growth of crucial abilities like critical reasoning, evaluation, and imaginative thinking (Carr, 2010). Furthermore, these tools can create a culture of dependency, where individuals become too reliant on technology rather than their abilities. Ethical concerns surrounding using AI text generators, particularly in academic settings, have recently gained momentum (Zohny et al., 2023). There are arguments that using these tools undermines the value of education and degrades the concept of intellectual property (IP) (Franklin, 2018). Misuse of AI text generators can result in fraudulent activities, such as submitting machine-generated papers as one's own work (Liu & Liu, 2018).

?Justifying Enhanced Productivity at the Cost of Intellectual Authenticity?

?While AI text generators offer numerous benefits, their impact on intellectual authenticity cannot be ignored (Draxler, 2023). The ease of producing high-quality content quickly has led to a shift in priorities, with some individuals valuing speed over accuracy and originality (Carr, 2010). This trend raises concerns about the long-term consequences of sacrificing intellectual authenticity for enhanced productivity. However, it is crucial to acknowledge that AI text generators are merely tools, and their application depends on the user's intentions and goals (Simonsen, 2022; Kim & Tan, 2023). When used responsibly, these tools can enhance productivity without compromising intellectual authenticity. For instance, authors can use AI text generators to brainstorm ideas, develop outlines, or refine drafts, but ultimately, the final product should reflect their unique voice and perspective (Kirby & Pullum, 2017).

?Conclusion

?The concept in question brings to mind numerous instances of dual-purpose scientific and technological breakthroughs. Consider, for instance, the car, which offers a comfortable mode of transportation but also leaves a significant carbon footprint in its wake. Similarly, airplanes promise rapid travel, yet they can also be used for destructive purposes, such as bombing vulnerable populations. The field of nuclear science is another prime example, with its applications ranging from life-saving nuclear medicine to the development of devastating nuclear weapons.

?The crux of the matter lies in human choice and ethical considerations. The pivotal role of education becomes apparent in shaping these choices. When education predominantly emphasizes cognitive development at the expense of emotional and moral growth, technological advancements, including artificial intelligence (AI), may pose inherent risks to human society.

?In conclusion, AI text generators possess both positive powers and negative aspects. While they offer improved productivity, consistency, and creative freedom, they threaten intellectual authenticity. To justify the enhanced productivity these tools provide, it is essential to balance their use and the preservation of intellectual authenticity. By acknowledging the limitations of AI text generators and using them responsibly, we can harness their power while maintaining the integrity of our work.

?References

?Baker, R., & Moore, M. G. (2022). Using Machine Scoring to Measure Student Learning Outcomes. Journal of Educational Data Mining, 14(1), 1-33. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4643513

Bozkurt, A., & Sharma, R. C. (2023a). Challenging the status quo and exploring the new boundaries in the age of algorithms: Reimagining the role of generative AI in distance education and online learning. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 18(1), i-viii. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7755273?

Bozkurt, A., & Sharma, R. C. (2023b). Generative AI and prompt engineering: The art of whispering to let the genie out of the algorithmic world. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 18(2), i-vii. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8174941

Brynjolfsson, E., McAfee, A., & Spence, A. M. (2018). The second mountain age: Work, progress, and prosperity in a time of brilliant technologies. New York, NY: WW Norton & Company.

Carr, N. (2010). The shallows: What the Internet is doing to our brains. New York, NY: WW Norton & Company.

Chen, B., Zhang, J., & Li, X. (2023). An adaptive assessment system based on intelligent tutoring systems. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 33, 1005-1024. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-022-00243-w

Creswell, A., White, T., Dumoulin, V., Arulkumaran, K., Sengupta, B., & Bharath, A. A. (2018). Generative Adversarial Networks: An Overview," in IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 53-65, Jan. 2018,? https://doi.org/10.1109/MSP.2017.2765202

Draxler, F., Werner, A., Lehmann, F., Hoppe, M., Schmidt, A., Buschek, D., & Welsch, R. (2023). The AI Ghostwriter Effect: Users Do Not Perceive Ownership of AI-Generated Text But Self-Declare as Authors. https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.03283

Dum, T. (2020). Singularity and the Future of Education. Educational Researcher, 49(3), 167-183. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X2040757

Eubanks, V. (2020). Automating inequality: How high-tech tools profile, police, and punish the poor. St. Martin's Press.

Franklin, M. J. (2018). The future of higher education: Rhetoric, reality, and the risks of the digital age. New York, NY: Routledge.

Gasser, U. (2022). Digital literacy and online safety in the context of AI and big data. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 32, 1025-1036. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-022-00234-z

Gong, Y. & Liu, X. (2001). Generic Text Summarization Using Relevance Measure and Latent Semantic Analysis. Proceedings of the 24 th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research anddevelopment in information retrieval, New Orleans, Louisiana, United States 2001, pp. 19-25

Goodfellow, I., Pouget-Abadie, J., Mirza, M., & Xu, B. (2014). Generative adversarial nets. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 26, 2672-2680.

Hovy, E. H., & Lischke, H. (2012). Dimensions of meaning and their impact on text interpretation. Computational Linguistics, 38(4), 479-506.

Hsin, Y., Wu, Y., & Tsai, C. (2020). Developing an immersive virtual learning environment for promoting student engagement and learning outcomes. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(4), 787-804. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10641-020-00939-x

Karita, S., Chen, N., Hayashi, T., Hori, T., Inaguma, H., Jiang, Z., Someki, M., Soplin, N.E.Y., Yamamoto, R., Wang, X., Watanabe, S., Yoshimura, T., & Zhang, W. (2019). A Comparative Study on Transformer vs RNN in Speech Applications, 2019 IEEE Automatic Speech Recognition and Understanding Workshop (ASRU), Singapore, pp. 449-456,? https://doi.org/10.1109/ASRU46091.2019.9003750

Kim, T. W., & Tan, Q. (2023). Repurposing Text-Generating AI into a Thought-Provoking Writing Tutor. https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.10543

Kirby, D., & Pullum, G. K. (2017). Automatic writing: The rise of the machines. Language and Literature, 26(3), 253-264.

Knezek, G., & Christensen, R. (2023). The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Teaching and Learning: A Review of the Literature. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 58(4), 465-500. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356301221075748

Levin, B. B., & Wilmer, E. (2020). Will robots replace teachers? The history and future of teaching machines. Teachers College Press. Liu, Y., & Liu, X. (2018). The role of artificial intelligence in academic writing: Benefits, challenges, and implications. Journal of Second Language Writing, 45, 53-66.

Mikolov, T., Sutskever, I., Chen, K., Corrado, G., & Dean, J. (2013). Distributed representations of words and phrases and their compositionality. In Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems - Volume 2 (NIPS'13). Curran Associates Inc., Red Hook, NY, USA, 3111–3119. Available at https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/2999792.2999959

Miller, R. K. (2018). The machine-learning revolution in natural language processing: Trends, challenges, and opportunities. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, 29(1), 201-214.

Ozsoy, M. G. (2011). Text Summarization Using Latent Semantic Analysis. Dissertation, Master of Science in Computer Engineering, Middle East Technical University. Available from: https://etd.lib.metu.edu.tr/upload/12612988/index.pdf

Simonsen, H.K. (2022). AI Text Generators and Text Producers, International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT), Bucharest, Romania, 2022, pp. 218-220, https://doi.org/10.1109/ICALT55010.2022.00071

Steinberger, J. &? Jezek, K. (2004). Latent Semantic Analysis in Text Summarization and Summary Evaluation. Proceedings of ISIM'04. 2004. 93-100. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/220017752_Using_Latent_Semantic_Analysis_in_Text_Summarization_and_Summary_Evaluation? [accessed Aug 08 2023].

Zohny, H., McMillan, J., & King, M. (2023). Ethics of generative AI. Journal of Medical Ethics, 49:79-80. https://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jme-2023-108909?

?Acknowledgment

Professor M Mukhopadhyay for his critical comments.

Originally published at & suggested citation:

Sharma, R. C. (2023). The Double-Edged Sword of AI Text Generators: Enhancing Productivity at the Cost of Intellectual Authenticity? Education@ETMA, 2(2), i-vii.