AI incident #302 ·

Dartmouth's Geisel School of Medicine Reportedly Used Canvas Activity Logs to Accuse Students of Cheating

Open on the AI Incident Database 1 news report Synced from the AIID API · record last edited 3 Sep 2026

What happened

Dartmouth's Geisel School of Medicine reportedly used Canvas learning-management activity logs and an internal analysis process to investigate remote-exam cheating during the 2020–2021 academic year. Seventeen medical students were charged after the school inferred that they accessed course materials during exams, but students and outside technical reviewers said automated Canvas activity may have been misread as intentional misconduct. Dartmouth later dropped the charges.

Editor's notes (AI Incident Database)

This record is retained as an incident because it describes a specific academic-misconduct investigation in which Geisel School of Medicine reportedly used Canvas learning-management activity logs and an internal analysis process to accuse students of cheating. The record is AIID-borderline because the implicated system appears to be a semi-opaque activity-log analysis rather than a conventional AI model; retention depends on treating the log-analysis process as an algorithmic decision-support system used in a high-stakes disciplinary context.

Only the incident metadata is stored here. The underlying news reports are on the AI Incident Database (CC BY-SA 4.0); use the links above to read them.

News reports (1)

Coverage catalogued by the AI Incident Database. Titles link to the original publisher; the text is not reproduced here.

Who was involved

Alleged harmed party
University students Students Sirey Zhang Medical students Geisel School of Medicine's students Geisel School of Medicine's professors Geisel School of Medicine's accused students Epistemic integrity Educational communities
On AIID: University students, Students, Sirey Zhang, Medical students, Geisel School of Medicine's students, Geisel School of Medicine's professors, Geisel School of Medicine's accused students, Epistemic integrity, Educational communities

AI systems implicated

Learning management system activity logsCanvasAutomated proctoring systemsAI-enabled decision support systems

Classification (MIT AI Risk Repository taxonomy)

Causal entity
AI
Intent
Unintentional
Timing
Post-deployment
Harm level
Sectors
Countries

Risk entries describing this failure mode

Entries from the MIT AI Risk Repository coded to subdomain 7.3.

  • Reliability issues

    "Relying on general-purpose AI products that fail to fulfil their intended function can lead to harm. For example, general- purpose AI systems can make up facts (‘hallucination’), generate erroneous computer code, or pro...

    International AI Safety Report 2025 (Bengio2025)

  • Type 2: Bigger than expected

    Harm can result from AI that was not expected to have a large impact at all, such as a lab leak, a surprisingly addictive open-source product, or an unexpected repurposing of a research prototype.

    TASRA: a Taxonomy and Analysis of Societal-Scale Risks from AI (Critch2023)

  • Type 3: Worse than expected

    AI intended to have a large societal impact can turn out harmful by mistake, such as a popular product that creates problems and partially solves them only for its users.

    TASRA: a Taxonomy and Analysis of Societal-Scale Risks from AI (Critch2023)

  • Ethics and Morality Issues

    LMs need to pay more attention to universally accepted societal values at the level of ethics and morality, including the judgement of right and wrong, and its relationship with social norms and laws.

    Towards Safer Generative Language Models: A Survey on Safety Risks, Evaluations, and Improvements (Deng2023)

  • Safe learning

    "AGIs should avoid making fatal mistakes during the learning phase. Subproblems include safe exploration and distributional shift (DeepMind, OpenAI), and continual learning (Berkeley)."

    AGI Safety Literature Review (Everitt2018 )

  • Malign belief distributions

    "Christiano (2016) argues that the universal distribution M (Hutter, 2005; Solomonoff, 1964a,b, 1978) is malign. The argument is somewhat intricate, and is based on the idea that a hypothesis about the world often includ...

    AGI Safety Literature Review (Everitt2018 )

  • Meta-cognition

    "Agents that reason about their own computational resources and logically uncertain events can encounter strange paradoxes due to Godelian limitations (Fallenstein and Soares, 2015; Soares and Fallenstein, 2014, 2017) an...

    AGI Safety Literature Review (Everitt2018 )

  • Misaligned consequentialist reasoning

    "As we think about even more intelligent and advanced AI assistants, perhaps outperforming humans on many cognitive tasks, the question of how humans can successfully control such an assistant looms large. To achieve the...

    The Ethics of Advanced AI Assistants (Gabriel2024)

Linked by AIID editors or by its text-similarity model.

Incidents in the same risk subdomain

All incidents in this subdomain