ArticlePeerJ. Computer science2025
A machine learning assistant for detecting fraudulent activities in synchronous online programming exams.
Article in PeerJ. Computer science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The rapid expansion of online learning has made education more accessible but has also introduced significant challenges in maintaining academic integrity, particularly during online exams. For certain types of exams, students are prohibited from connecting to the Internet to prevent them from accessing unauthorized resources, utilizing generative artificial intelligence tools, or engaging in other forms of cheating. However, in online exams, students must remain connected to the Internet. Most existing online proctoring systems rely on various devices to monitor students' actions and environments during the exam, focusing on tracking physical behavior, such as facial expressions, eye movements, and the presence of unauthorized materials, rather than analyzing the students' work within their computers. This often requires human review to determine whether students are engaging in unauthorized actions. This article presents the development and evaluation of a machine-learning-based assistant designed to assist instructors in detecting fraudulent activities in real-time during online programming exams. Our system leverages a convolutional neural network (CNN) followed by a recurrent neural network (RNN) and a dense layer to analyze sequences of screenshot frames captured from students' screens during exams. The system achieves an accuracy of 95.18% and an F
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.