Difference between revisions of "AI in education"
KevinYager (talk | contribs) (→AI improves learning/education) |
KevinYager (talk | contribs) (→AI in Education) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
=AI in Education= | =AI in Education= | ||
| + | ==Survey/study of== | ||
| + | * 2023-08: [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-38964-3 Perception, performance, and detectability of conversational artificial intelligence across 32 university courses] | ||
| + | |||
==AI improves learning/education== | ==AI improves learning/education== | ||
* Mollick, Ethan R. and Mollick, Lilach and Bach, Natalie and Ciccarelli, LJ and Przystanski, Ben and Ravipinto, Daniel, [https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4871171 AI Agents and Education: Simulated Practice at Scale] (June 17, 2024). The Wharton School Research Paper. [http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4871171 doi: 10.2139/ssrn.4871171] | * Mollick, Ethan R. and Mollick, Lilach and Bach, Natalie and Ciccarelli, LJ and Przystanski, Ben and Ravipinto, Daniel, [https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4871171 AI Agents and Education: Simulated Practice at Scale] (June 17, 2024). The Wharton School Research Paper. [http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4871171 doi: 10.2139/ssrn.4871171] | ||
Revision as of 09:23, 14 October 2024
Contents
AI in Education
Survey/study of
AI improves learning/education
- Mollick, Ethan R. and Mollick, Lilach and Bach, Natalie and Ciccarelli, LJ and Przystanski, Ben and Ravipinto, Daniel, AI Agents and Education: Simulated Practice at Scale (June 17, 2024). The Wharton School Research Paper. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.4871171
- Can enable personalized education.
- Generative AI for Programming Education: Benchmarking ChatGPT, GPT-4, and Human Tutors
- GPT4 can out-perform human tutors.
AI harms learning
- A real-world test of artificial intelligence infiltration of a university examinations system: A “Turing Test” case study ** Current grading systems cannot detect AI.
- Bastani, Hamsa and Bastani, Osbert and Sungu, Alp and Ge, Haosen and Kabakcı, Özge and Mariman, Rei, Generative AI Can Harm Learning (July 15, 2024). The Wharton School Research Paper.doi: 10.2139/ssrn.4895486
- Access to ChatGPT harmed math education outcomes.
Software/systems
AI/human
AI out-performs humans
Tests
- 2024-06: A real-world test of artificial intelligence infiltration of a university examinations system: A “Turing Test” case study
- AI scores higher than median students.
Creativity
- 2023-09: Best humans still outperform artificial intelligence in a creative divergent thinking task
- Best humans out-perform AI at creativity. (By implication, median humans may not.)
- 2024-02: The current state of artificial intelligence generative language models is more creative than humans on divergent thinking tasks
- 2024-02: Felin, Teppo and Holweg, Matthias, Theory Is All You Need: AI, Human Cognition, and Causal Reasoning (February 24, 2024). doi: 10.2139/ssrn.4737265
- Argues that human "theory-based" creativity is better than AI "data-based".
- 2024-07: Pron vs Prompt: Can Large Language Models already Challenge a World-Class Fiction Author at Creative Text Writing?
- Top human (professional author) out-performs GPT4.
- 2024-09: Can LLMs Generate Novel Research Ideas? A Large-Scale Human Study with 100+ NLP Researchers
- LLMs can be creative
Professions
- 2024-03: Influence of a Large Language Model on Diagnostic Reasoning: A Randomized Clinical Vignette Study
- GPT4 improves medical practitioner work; surprisingly, GPT4 alone scored better than a human with GPT4 as aid (on selected tasks).
AI improves human work
- TBD
Uptake
TBD
