Scribd
Upload
21 views4 pages

CS636

The document discusses AI writing detection, indicating that 27% of the text is likely AI-generated, and emphasizes the importance of human judgment in assessing academic integrity. It outlines the constraints violated in a modeling scenario, specifically consistency and type correctness, and suggests methods to prevent such issues. Additionally, it compares two methodologies for developing a health management system, advocating for a structured approach to ensure quality and scalability.

Uploaded by

Syyed Ghazi
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
21 views4 pages

CS636

The document discusses AI writing detection, indicating that 27% of the text is likely AI-generated, and emphasizes the importance of human judgment in assessing academic integrity. It outlines the constraints violated in a modeling scenario, specifically consistency and type correctness, and suggests methods to prevent such issues. Additionally, it compares two methodologies for developing a health management system, advocating for a structured approach to ensure quality and scalability.

Uploaded by

Syyed Ghazi
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

Page 1 of 4 - Cover Page Submission ID trn:oid:::17268:95714130

gggg hhhh
CS636.docx
My Files

My Files

University

Document Details

Submission ID

trn:oid:::17268:95714130 2 Pages

Submission Date 394 Words

May 13, 2025, 11:06 PM GMT+5:30


2,339 Characters

Download Date

May 13, 2025, 11:06 PM GMT+5:30

File Name

CS636.docx

File Size

16.0 KB

Page 1 of 4 - Cover Page Submission ID trn:oid:::17268:95714130


Page 2 of 4 - AI Writing Overview Submission ID trn:oid:::17268:95714130

27% detected as AI Caution: Review required.

The percentage indicates the combined amount of likely AI-generated text as It is essential to understand the limitations of AI detection before making decisions
well as likely AI-generated text that was also likely AI-paraphrased. about a student’s work. We encourage you to learn more about Turnitin’s AI detection
capabilities before using the tool.

Detection Groups
1 AI-generated only 27%
Likely AI-generated text from a large-language model.

0 AI-generated text that was AI-paraphrased 0%


Likely AI-generated text that was likely revised using an AI-paraphrase tool
or word spinner.

Disclaimer
Our AI writing assessment is designed to help educators identify text that might be prepared by a generative AI tool. Our AI writing assessment may not always be accurate (it may misidentify
writing that is likely AI generated as AI generated and AI paraphrased or likely AI generated and AI paraphrased writing as only AI generated) so it should not be used as the sole basis for
adverse actions against a student. It takes further scrutiny and human judgment in conjunction with an organization's application of its specific academic policies to determine whether any
academic misconduct has occurred.

Frequently Asked Questions

How should I interpret Turnitin's AI writing percentage and false positives?


The percentage shown in the AI writing report is the amount of qualifying text within the submission that Turnitin’s AI writing
detection model determines was either likely AI-generated text from a large-language model or likely AI-generated text that was
likely revised using an AI-paraphrase tool or word spinner.

False positives (incorrectly flagging human-written text as AI-generated) are a possibility in AI models.

AI detection scores under 20%, which we do not surface in new reports, have a higher likelihood of false positives. To reduce the
likelihood of misinterpretation, no score or highlights are attributed and are indicated with an asterisk in the report (*%).

The AI writing percentage should not be the sole basis to determine whether misconduct has occurred. The reviewer/instructor
should use the percentage as a means to start a formative conversation with their student and/or use it to examine the submitted
assignment in accordance with their school's policies.

What does 'qualifying text' mean?


Our model only processes qualifying text in the form of long-form writing. Long-form writing means individual sentences contained in paragraphs that make up a
longer piece of written work, such as an essay, a dissertation, or an article, etc. Qualifying text that has been determined to be likely AI-generated will be
highlighted in cyan in the submission, and likely AI-generated and then likely AI-paraphrased will be highlighted purple.

Non-qualifying text, such as bullet points, annotated bibliographies, etc., will not be processed and can create disparity between the submission highlights and the
percentage shown.

Page 2 of 4 - AI Writing Overview Submission ID trn:oid:::17268:95714130


Page 3 of 4 - AI Writing Submission Submission ID trn:oid:::17268:95714130

CS636 - Formal Methods

Answer:

The modeling scenario violates two key constraints: consistency and type correctness.

1. Consistency Constraint Violation:


The contradiction between the two diagrams—one showing soda inventory decreasing
after coin insertion and the other after dispensing—violates behavioral consistency.
Inconsistent diagrams can lead to unpredictable system behavior and confusion in
implementation. To avoid this, the team should synchronize all models through cross-
verification and maintain a single source of truth for each system behavior.

2. Type Constraint Violation:


Using an integer variable as a Boolean guard breaches type correctness. Guards should
strictly use Boolean expressions. Type mismatches can cause logic errors or system
crashes. This can be avoided by using strict data type declarations and validating
expressions during model checking or simulation.

Ensuring model consistency and type accuracy through regular peer reviews, tool-based
validation, and adherence to formal modeling guidelines can prevent such issues and improve
the reliability of concurrent systems.

CS403 - Database Management Systems

Answer:

Group B’s structured methodology is more suitable for developing a health management
system, considering the system’s complexity, sensitivity of patient data, and future scalability.
By using DFDs and ERDs, Group B ensures clarity in data flow, accurate entity relationships, and
minimizes errors during implementation. This approach enhances data integrity, consistency,
and makes the system easier to maintain and scale over time.

Group A’s ad hoc method may seem faster in the short term but can lead to data redundancy,
design flaws, and difficulty in scaling or modifying the system later. However, in small-scale or
temporary projects with low complexity and strict time constraints, an ad hoc approach might
be preferable to deliver a quick, basic solution—only if future growth is not expected.

Page 3 of 4 - AI Writing Submission Submission ID trn:oid:::17268:95714130


Page 4 of 4 - AI Writing Submission Submission ID trn:oid:::17268:95714130

In conclusion, for a critical and long-term system like HealthSync, structured design (Group B) is
essential to ensure quality, accuracy, and long-term success.

In the given scenario, two main constraints are violated: consistency and type correctness. The
contradiction in soda inventory updates across diagrams reflects a consistency issue, which can
cause confusion and faulty system behavior. This should be avoided by ensuring all diagrams
align logically and are cross-checked. The use of an integer as a Boolean guard represents a
type constraint violation, leading to logical errors. This can be prevented by enforcing strict
type usage and validating expressions during modeling. Proper reviews and modeling standards
help maintain accuracy in concurrent systems.

Page 4 of 4 - AI Writing Submission Submission ID trn:oid:::17268:95714130

You might also like