Raw LLM Responses
Inspect the exact model output for any coded comment.
Look up by comment ID
Random samples — click to inspect
in
Going from one sentence to a fully published video is wild. The fact that this r…
7449420487413…
in
I find it rather ironic that, in the comments section, people who are willing to…
7463899542464…
in
Enrique Marq, I really appreciate the engineering and the idea behind this, it’s…
7450613623892…
in
What stands out is how quickly the stack is converging around three core capabil…
7463362855157…
in
In the context of AI, informal data stewards are the people catching the problem…
7455462971734…
in
Great job! Now I'm waiting for somebody to build an AI system that consumes Link…
7448432075789…
in
This "powerfull free tier" is just one prompt and wait 5-7days. How I know? Few …
7464010140208…
in
Imagine explaining your job in 2036: “I don’t build products anymore - I generat…
7464363003648…
Comment
There can’t be anything more demoralising to a lecturer than marking work you can clearly see is AI-generated but it can’t be conclusively proved by available integrity software. How is it even possible to allocate a fair mark in those circumstances, especially when there is a clear disjoint between the standard of the student’s usual performance in class and the standard of the dissertation submitted. A possible solution is to call for an oral defence of the work.
LinkedIn
AI Research & Models
Doctor of Laws, Practising Attorney (Commercial…
2026-05-23T11:1…
Coding Result
| Dimension | Value |
|---|---|
| Primary value | fairness |
| Secondary value | accountability |
| Alignment target | individual_users |
| Stance | demanding |
| Emotion | outrage |
| Value justification | The speaker wants AI-generated work to be identifiable and fairly marked, implying a desire for fairness in assessment. |
| Target justification | The target of the speaker's concern is the individual student, whose usual performance in class may not reflect the standard of their submitted dissertation. |
| Coded at | 2026-06-11T08:01:24Z |
Raw LLM Response
```
{
"value_primary": "fairness",
"value_secondary": "accountability",
"target": "individual_users",
"stance": "demanding",
"emotion": "outrage",
"value_justification": "The speaker wants AI-generated work to be identifiable and fairly marked, implying a desire for fairness in assessment.",
"target_justification": "The target of the speaker's concern is the individual student, whose usual performance in class may not reflect the standard of their submitted dissertation."
}
```