[atoav]

Last week I read through 10 project proposals by students. Two of those ticked all boxes for LLM writing throughout their full text. Not that I checked for LLM-markers specifically, but if a text makes you go: wait a minute, am I reading the output of an LLM? only to then present you with more markers also content-wise, that will have an impact on the human reading the text.

And it should. If someone sends me an obvious copy-paste mass email it also has an impact on how serious I take that email to be meant as an actionable proposal targeted at me specifically.

If they half-ass their proposal which has to do with language I can reasonably infer they may also half-ass the real world implementation which in this case also had to do with language. If you're unable to describe your own idea on half a page of paper in your own words, maybe the students who are able to do so should be treated fair.

I don't care wheter or not they use LLMs, in fact do. But engage with the ideas and results and convince me you really care about them.

[benhurmarcel]

Exactly, without talking about automated checkers or publishing policies, if a text gives readers the impression is was LLM-generated it will affect how they judge it.

Recently a contractor presented a small internal tool they made for a very specific task. The UI text gave a direct impression to be entirely LLM-generated with no human edition. It makes the entire tool look vibe-coded, affecting how we judge it. Now I question whether they even reviewed the functionality correctness, which I wouldn't doubt if the UI didn't look generated.