Can AI Recognize Its Own Reflection? Self-Detection Performance of LLMs in Computing Education
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
The rapid advancement of Large Language Models (LLMs) presents a significant challenge to academic integrity within computing education. As educators seek reliable detection methods, this paper evaluates the capacity of three prominent LLMs (GPT-4, Claude, and Gemini) to identify AI-generated text in computing-specific contexts. We test their performance under both standard and 'deceptive' prompt conditions, where the models were instructed to evade detection. Our findings reveal a significant instability: while default AI-generated text was easily identified, all models struggled to correctly classify human-written work (with error rates up to 32%). Furthermore, the models were highly susceptible to deceptive prompts, with Gemini's output completely fooling GPT-4. Given that simple prompt alterations significantly degrade detection efficacy, our results demonstrate that these LLMs are currently too unreliable for making high-stakes academic misconduct judgments.
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 29 Dec 2025.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.
3 papers.
- 2026Style, Not Self: Surface Cues Explain Zero-Shot Code Attribution by Large Language Models24 Sep 2026
- 2026Evaluating the Semantic-to-Geometric Gap in Adversarial Defenses Against Vision-Language Model-Based Plagiarism22 Sep 2026
- 2026Show, Don't TELL: Explainable AI-Generated Text Detection27 May 2026