> I would think it’s reasonable to look for patterns across each student’s work. A single Pangram

Strong disagree here. If a tool fails the basic test of teacher getting flagged on some text that they wrote personally, that tool should never be used. Being accused of cheating can have huge repercussions on a student's future. No way should a black-box classifier be used to decide their fate.

I said we shouldn't penalize students for single positives. That's bad use of statistics.

It's also bad use of statistics to claim that an indicator can never be used unless it's 100% perfect. When you start accumulating constant triggers, you do a deeper investigation.

For example, bring the student in and give them a surprise (no preparation) quiz about the paper they submitted. The students who wrote the paper can talk about what they wrote. The students who submitted ChatGPT usually can't.

You don't just put the paper into Pangram and then let it decide if the student gets punished based on the score.