Key facts
- Thierry Rignol, a student in Yale's Executive MBA program, is suing Yale after being suspended and receiving an F for allegedly using AI on a final exam.
- Rignol claims the AI detection tools used by Yale are unreliable and biased, and that the disciplinary process was politically motivated.
- His lawsuit includes 13 causes of action, such as breach of contract, civil rights violations, and defamation.
- Yale alleges Rignol was evasive during the investigation, particularly concerning the submission of a draft file for his exam.
- The university's Honor Committee investigated the allegations, leading to Rignol's accusation of improper AI use.
Thierry Rignol, a student in Yale's Executive MBA program, has filed a 13-count federal lawsuit against the university after being suspended and receiving an F for allegedly using artificial intelligence on a final exam. Rignol, who claims to have been a top student, asserts that the AI detection tools used by Yale are unreliable and biased, particularly against non-native English speakers like himself. He further alleges that the disciplinary process was a sham designed to censor his "protected conservative political speech."
The dispute began with Rignol's final exam in the Sourcing and Managing Funds course in spring 2024. While 71 other students submitted exams without issue, Rignol's was flagged by a teaching assistant due to its unusual length and content flagged by the AI detection tool GPTZero. A professor noted that one answer showed overlap with ChatGPT output and that Rignol performed poorly on a question where AI tools were less helpful.
Over the summer of 2024, administrators investigated the matter. Rignol maintained his innocence, attributing his thorough writing style to his academic excellence and background as a non-native English speaker. He claimed Yale deans pressured him to confess and even invoked the fear of deportation, though Yale stated this was merely explaining potential consequences.
Yale's filings portray Rignol as stalling. Professor James Choi, leading the Honor Committee, repeatedly requested the original Microsoft Word file used to draft the exam, suggesting it could reveal AI usage. Rignol did not provide the file, leading Choi to warn that failure to cooperate could be viewed as an "extraordinary violation of the Honor Code."
In September, Rignol was officially notified of the accusation of improperly utilizing AI. He requested a postponement of his hearing due to a wedding in Europe, which was granted. Upon his return, he questioned the composition of the committee, arguing for the recusal of student members who had not taken the same courses. The committee denied this, and the hearing proceeded in early November, with Rignol continuing to assert his innocence.