用博弈模型揭示评估设计如何改变学生使用AI的集体行为。
Mathematical Modelling of Ethical AI Use in Higher Education: A Coordination Game Framework for Future-Facing Learning
- 将学生AI使用建模为受同伴预期和评估设计影响的协调博弈。
- 微调反思性评估激励可触发负责任使用AI的快速转变。
- 适合教育政策制定者和课程设计者参考,无需监控或惩罚。
生成式人工智能在高等教育中的快速普及正在重塑评估方式,并加剧对学术诚信、公平性和学习质量的担忧。尽管机构越来越多地强调政策指导和伦理原则,但对学生群体中负责任或投机性使用AI的集体规范如何形成并稳定仍缺乏正式理解。本文将学生在评估中的AI使用重新定义为由同伴预期和评估设计共同塑造的协调问题,而非仅依赖个体合规。我们构建了一个基于演化博弈论的协调框架,涵盖学习价值、努力程度、感知公平性和透明度,其中机构的AI治理通过反思性评估激励隐含体现。通过解析结果和有限种群模拟,揭示了学生AI使用的行为转变具有阈值驱动特征:微小且精准的反思性评估激励调整,即可引发向以学习为导向的负责任使用模式的快速转变;而弱或错配的激励则导致投机行为持续存在。这些非线性动态解释了为何单纯政策声明常难以改变行为,而适度的评估重构却可能产生显著影响。本研究为高等教育机构提供了一种机制层面的理解,支持以教学法为核心的未来学习型治理,避免依赖监控或惩罚手段。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
The rapid uptake of generative artificial intelligence (AI) in higher education is reshaping assessment practices and intensifying concerns around academic integrity, fairness, and learning quality. While institutional responses increasingly emphasise policy guidance and ethical principles, there remains limited formal understanding of how collective norms of responsible or opportunistic AI use emerge and stabilise within student cohorts. This paper reframes student AI use in assessment as a coordination problem shaped by peer expectations and assessment design rather than individual compliance alone. We develop a coordination-based evolutionary game-theoretic framework that captures learning value, effort, perceived fairness, and transparency, with institutional AI governance modelled implicitly through reflective assessment incentives. We use analytical results and finite-population simulations to reveal threshold-driven behavioural transitions in student AI use: small, well-calibrated changes in reflective assessment incentives can trigger rapid shifts towards responsible, learning-oriented AI-use norms, whereas weak or misaligned incentives allow opportunistic practices to persist. These non-linear dynamics explain why policy statements alone often fail to change behaviour, while modest assessment redesigns can have disproportionate effects. By providing a mechanism-level account of how assessment structures shape collective AI-use practices, this work offers higher education institutions an analytically grounded tool for Future Facing Learning, supporting proportionate, pedagogy-led AI governance without reliance on surveillance or punitive enforcement.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。