skip to main content
10.1145/3386527.3406726acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication Pagesl-at-sConference Proceedingsconference-collections
short-paper

Detecting Contract Cheaters in Online Programming Classes with Keystroke Dynamics

Authors Info & Claims
Published:12 August 2020Publication History

ABSTRACT

In online programming classes, it is tricky to uphold academic honesty in the assessment process. A common approach, plagiarism detection, is not accurate for novice programmers and ineffective for detecting contract cheaters. We present a new approach, cheating detection with keystroke dynamics in programming classes, and evaluated the approach.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

3386527.3406726.mp4

mp4

38.3 MB

References

  1. Steven Burrows and Seyed MM Tahaghoghi. 2007. Source code authorship attribution using n-grams. In Proceedings of the Twelth Australasian Document Computing Symposium, Melbourne, Australia, RMIT University. Citeseer, 32--39.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Aylin Caliskan-Islam, Richard Harang, Andrew Liu, Arvind Narayanan, Clare Voss, Fabian Yamaguchi, and Rachel Greenstadt. 2015. De-anonymizing programmers via code stylometry. In 24th USENIX Security Symposium (USENIX Security), Washington, DC.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Daniele Gunetti and Claudia Picardi. 2005. Keystroke analysis of free text. ACM Transactions on Information and System Security (TISSEC) 8, 3 (2005), 312--347.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Lingxiao Jiang, Ghassan Misherghi, Zhendong Su, and Stephane Glondu. 2007. Deckard: Scalable and accurate tree-based detection of code clones. In Proceedings of the 29th international conference on Software Engineering. IEEE Computer Society, 96--105.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Marcus Karnan, Muthuramalingam Akila, and Nishara Krishnaraj. 2011. Biometric personal authentication using keystroke dynamics: A review. Applied soft computing 11, 2 (2011), 1565--1573.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Donald L McCabe. 2005. Cheating among college and university students: A North American perspective. International Journal for Educational Integrity 1, 1 (2005).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Merylin Monaro, Chiara Galante, Riccardo Spolaor, Qian Qian Li, Luciano Gamberini, Mauro Conti, and Giuseppe Sartori. 2018. Covert lie detection using keyboard dynamics. Scientific reports 8, 1 (2018), 1976.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Terence Sim and Rajkumar Janakiraman. 2007. Are digraphs good for free-text keystroke dynamics?. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2007. CVPR'07. IEEE Conference on. IEEE, 1--6.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Detecting Contract Cheaters in Online Programming Classes with Keystroke Dynamics

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Other conferences
          L@S '20: Proceedings of the Seventh ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale
          August 2020
          442 pages
          ISBN:9781450379519
          DOI:10.1145/3386527

          Copyright © 2020 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 12 August 2020

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • short-paper

          Acceptance Rates

          Overall Acceptance Rate117of440submissions,27%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader