标题： AI工具对学习成果的影响：知识减少和过度依赖 显示英文标题

标题： Impact of AI Tools on Learning Outcomes: Decreasing Knowledge and Over-Reliance

摘要： 学生在各个教育层次上越来越依赖生成式人工智能（AI）工具来完成作业和取得更高的考试成绩。 然而，这种依赖如何影响他们的动机、对材料的真实理解程度，以及在多大程度上替代了知识获取的过程，仍然不清楚。 为了研究生成式AI对学习成果的影响，在布达佩斯考文纽斯大学进行了一项实验。 在运筹学课程中，学生被随机分成两组：一组在课堂和考试中被允许使用AI工具，而另一组则不允许。 为确保公平，引入了一种补偿机制：表现较差的小组学生获得分数调整，直到两组的平均表现相等。 尽管组织者尽最大努力解释实验设计并为所有参与者创造平等的机会，但许多学生认为这个实验是一个重大干扰。 尽管该实验得到了所有相关大学机构的批准——包括伦理委员会、系主任、项目负责人和学生会——学生还是将他们的担忧反映到了媒体，并最终引起了匈牙利高等教育国家秘书处的关注。 因此，在完成之前，实验必须进行大幅修改：在期末考试中，测试组与对照组合并。 尽管如此，数据仍使我们能够就学生的学**习习惯得出决定性的结论。 AI工具的无控制使用导致学生参与度下降，对材料的理解程度较低。 学生的极端反应甚至比收集到的数据更具启示性：生成式AI工具已经成为学生不可或缺的工具，这引发了对其学习过程有效性的根本性问题。 显示英文摘要

摘要： Students at all levels of education are increasingly relying on generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools to complete assignments and achieve higher exam scores. However, it remains unclear how this reliance affects their motivation, their genuine understanding of the material, and the extent to which it substitutes for the process of knowledge acquisition. To investigate the impact of generative AI on learning outcomes, an experiment was conducted at Corvinus University of Budapest. In an operations research class, students were randomly assigned into two groups: one was permitted to use AI tools during classes and examinations, while the other was not. To ensure fairness, a compensation mechanism was introduced: students in the lower-performing group received point adjustments until the average performance of the two groups was equalized. Despite the organizers' best efforts to explain the design and to create equal opportunities for all participants, many students perceived the experiment as a major disruption. Although the experiment was approved by every relevant university authority -- including the Ethics Board, the Head of Department, the Program Director, and the Student Council -- students escalated their concerns to the media and eventually to the State Secretary for Higher Education of Hungary. As a result, the experiment had to be substantially revised before completion: on the final exam the test group was merged with the control group. Still, the data allowed us to draw decisive conclusions regarding the students' learning habits. Uncontrolled use of AI tools leads to disengaged students and low understanding of material. The extreme reactions of the students proved even more revealing than the data collected: generative AI tools have already become indispensable for students, raising fundamental questions about the validity of their learning process.