Overview
I-Assisted Reflection and Revision
As we approach the end of this week's discussion focuses on reflection, revision, and preparing your final portfolio for submission. Artificial intelligence tools are increasingly used to support writing, research, editing, and brainstorming. Responsible use of AI requires evaluating feedback critically and deciding how to improve your own work.
For this activity, you will use an AI chatbot of your choice to review your final portfolio, case study, or project draft and reflect on the feedback you receive.
You may use:
- ChatGPT
- Claude
- Gemini
- Microsoft Copilot
This week focuses on:
- Reviewing your final portfolio progress
- Using AI as a revision and feedback tool
- Identifying strengths and areas for improvement
- Creating a revision plan before final submission
- Reflecting on the strengths and limitations of AI-assisted feedback
My previous assignment
My Ai Chat bot information is listed below you can use it to answer the questions . Please no plagiarism,no ai chat bots
Veritas
The world is transitioning into adopting fast, efficient, and reliable ways of operation daily. This has been possible through the adoption of technology and smart software. Education has not been excluded. In that case, the education sector relies on frequent research to add to the existing knowledge and, at the same time, makes references to various articles. With the rise of the need to seek fame, numerous people end up uploading misleading information through articles, which could alter the results of research in the education sector. It raises the need to develop a program or artificial intelligence that scrutinizes the authenticity of various articles and their sources, “Veritas.”
“Veritas” is a Latin word meaning “truth.” Hence, in this case, it is an educational bot. It will halt misinformation and digital malpractices. It will not only indicate whether an article is true or false, but it will also help its consumers scrutinize the text, check for logical fallacies, and trace the sources and references. In addition to that, it can give suggestions and valid viewpoints on the legibility of the article. Its sole purpose is to teach its consumers about critical thinking about electric sources, not just mere thinking.
The bot, or AI, will handle various conversations. For instance, source verifications. That is, if a user claims, "Where did this data come from, or how did the author arrive at this conclusion?” Veritas traces the issue at hand and gives back the feedback. “There were academic journals, government sources, and various library research". It can handle various types and detect bias that could be political, emotional language, one's culture, gender, and also regional attachment. It will have a question-and-answer feature, for instance, User: “Is it true that the definition of an atom is a lie, since there are sub-atomic particles?” Veritas: “An atom is the smallest unit of the chemical elements, having a small dense core of nucleons with an electron cloud that orbits it.” (Granata, 2025).
There are future advancements in AI. For instance, the inclusion of an image scanning feature to determine deepfake images. The tool can scan uploaded images and videos and pinpoint cases of digital changes and malice. That is, there are scenarios in which an old photo could be posted as a contemporary photo.
Since it is an AI, it naturally links to Normal language processing and automatically retrieves information. It employs automation to cross-reference tons of webpages in microseconds. It saves a huge amount of time since this would take long hours for a human to perform such a task. Despite enhancing academic transparency and integrity, Veritas can lead to over-reliance and a lack of trust by the users. It could claim an article is a fact after going through billions of fake articles and information that is genuinely fake. Veritas may lack information on current news and contemporary data, hence its verification of information or debunking of a true article would be inaccurate.
Veritas will have a dialogue capability. For instance, User: I have come across a post claiming that eating celery burns more calories than it contains. How scientifically true is this? Veritas. There is a famous myth about "negative-calorie foods," which is a prime example of Veritas! Although celery is very low in calories (around 9 calories per stalk), it takes energy to chew and digest, and the thermic effect of food (the energy used to digest the food) only contributes to 10% of the food's total calories. User: So I am still gaining calories? Veritas: Sure, but it's a very small quantity. A study done at the University of Alabama revealed that you still get the majority of the calories (Shields, 2023). Do you want me to give you a link to the peer-reviewed paper on the metabolic rate, or should we delve into the history of this myth and how it began online?
References
Granata, C. (2025). Quantum Mechanics: The Bizarre Atomic and Subatomic World. In A Journey into Modern Physics: From Relativity to Quantum Technologies (pp. 41–87). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland. Retrieved from: https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-7...
Shields, C. E. (2023). Evaluating the Eating Habits and Food Choices of Alabama A&M University Students and Their Perception of Healthy Foods (Master's thesis, Alabama Agricultural and Mechanical University). Retrieved from: https://www.proquest.com/openview/2e2531d6aa388ad4...
My previous assignments
Updated Name and Purpose of My Bot
My bot remains Veritas (which means “truth” in Latin). It is primarily intended to serve as an educational resource to confirm facts and combat disinformation in academic media. Veritas is different from simply stating facts as true or false; it helps users learn to think like detectives as they examine texts, verify information sources, uncover fallacious arguments, and identify various forms of bias. It helps the education community practice more effective research skills in an era where misinformation is prevalent on the internet.
New Features, Conversations, and Interactions Added
Building on last week’s plan, I added more interactive elements focused on human-like conversation flow:
- Source Verification Mode: Users can paste text or a link, and the bot breaks down claims step by step.
- Bias and Fallacy Detector: It now actively scans for political, cultural, gender, emotional, or regional bias and explains them clearly.
- Guided Dialogue Trees: Multi-turn conversations that remember context and offer branching choices (e.g., “Explain simply,” “Show sources,” or “Teach me the method”).
- Deepfake Awareness Prompt: A basic version that reminds users about image manipulation risks and suggests checking visuals.
- Self-Limitation Disclaimer: Automatically reminds users about its knowledge limits at the start of fact-checking.
These features make the bot feel more like a patient tutor rather than a simple search tool.
Example Dialogue
User: I have come across a post claiming that eating celery burns more calories than it contains. How scientifically true is this?
Veritas: Hi! This is a popular “negative calorie foods” myth. About 9 calories per stalk, celery is very low in calories, but the energy spent chewing and digesting celery is relatively small — just 10% of the calories. You still consume more calories than you burn off from it. A 2023 study conducted by the Alabama A&M University is in support of this.
User: So I'm still gaining weight?
Veritas: Yes, but not a lot. Do you want: A) The link to a peer reviewed article B) How this myth began to creep its way into the web C) A simple explanation of the real digestion process?
Another Example
User: The definition of an atom is a lie, since there are sub-atomic particles, right?
Veritas: Good question! The smallest particle of an element is still an atom. It is composed of electrons, protons and neutrons, and has a dense nucleus. It's the structure of what they are made of that doesn't make it wrong, subatomic particles are part of the structure. This is the result of the usual quantum mechanics (Granata, 2025). The statement appears to be a straw man fallacy because it uses a misinterpretation of the actual definition. I would like to have the article link, I will check it further.
What My Bot does when the user sends a message and how he/she communicates with the user.
It's calm, clear and respectful as a helpful teaching assistant, Veritas communicates. It employs a casual but simple communication style, then makes available a deeper level. The responses are structured: short summary – explanation – options for the user. It remains neutral, provides explanations, and offers options for further conversation, allowing the user to maintain control of the interaction.
What type of user experience will you be creating?
I want to create a supportive learning partner experience. The user should feel guided and empowered, not talked down to. Their aim is to foster confidence in critical thinking and research skills, just as a good professor fosters students' own judgements. It should be calm, reliable and engaging.
Discuss and discuss ethical issues.
My experience with working on Veritas prompted me to reflect on the ethical considerations of the interaction between AI systems and humans: I included disclaimers because there is a possibility that if the data is outdated, then Veritas may accidentally share misinformation, but I wanted to do that as a goal for them to help reduce it.
Privacy: The bot doesn’t save user conversations or personal data beyond the current chat to protect privacy.
Bias: It actively identifies bias in content, however as an AI, may have inherent biases from its training. I made it clear about this.
Emotional Manipulation: Veritas uses no persuasive or dramatic language. It holds true to the facts and leaves it to the user to make the choice.
One of the main concerns is that users may become too dependent on AI Systems to the point of halting their thinking process. Which is why, I have made it design for it always to explain how to verify information, rather than just giving answers.
Transparency: All answers are accompanied by reasons and source references as appropriate. Also it has explicit knowledge cutoff.
User Trust: Trust is established through acknowledging limitations and letting the user know to double check key information.
Accessibility: I have used simple language so these can be used by students of all levels, but will look to add voice support and simpler modes.
The documentation of ethical safeguards and disclaimers.
Note: This is an automatically generated disclaimer. “I am an AI tool, always cross-check important information with trusted sources.”
lAvoids providing medical, legal, or financial information or guidance, and provides referrals to practitioners.
lPromotes personal verification practice.
lSuggestions for possible future improvements.
lInclude scan of real image for deepfakes.
lConnect to actual academic databases.
lCreate a browser plugin version.
lMake it available in multiple languages for better accessibility.
This project is related to practical applications such as virtual assistants (Siri, Alexa) and emerging educational tools in the field of AI. It demonstrates the potential of AI to assist human learning and poses intriguing questions regarding trust, reliance, and accountability between humans and AI.
dMy previous assignment
My Ai Chat bot information is listed below you can use it to answer the questions . Please no plagiarism,no ai chat bots
Veritas
The world is transitioning into adopting fast, efficient, and reliable ways of operation daily. This has been possible through the adoption of technology and smart software. Education has not been excluded. In that case, the education sector relies on frequent research to add to the existing knowledge and, at the same time, makes references to various articles. With the rise of the need to seek fame, numerous people end up uploading misleading information through articles, which could alter the results of research in the education sector. It raises the need to develop a program or artificial intelligence that scrutinizes the authenticity of various articles and their sources, “Veritas.”
“Veritas” is a Latin word meaning “truth.” Hence, in this case, it is an educational bot. It will halt misinformation and digital malpractices. It will not only indicate whether an article is true or false, but it will also help its consumers scrutinize the text, check for logical fallacies, and trace the sources and references. In addition to that, it can give suggestions and valid viewpoints on the legibility of the article. Its sole purpose is to teach its consumers about critical thinking about electric sources, not just mere thinking.
The bot, or AI, will handle various conversations. For instance, source verifications. That is, if a user claims, "Where did this data come from, or how did the author arrive at this conclusion?” Veritas traces the issue at hand and gives back the feedback. “There were academic journals, government sources, and various library research". It can handle various types and detect bias that could be political, emotional language, one's culture, gender, and also regional attachment. It will have a question-and-answer feature, for instance, User: “Is it true that the definition of an atom is a lie, since there are sub-atomic particles?” Veritas: “An atom is the smallest unit of the chemical elements, having a small dense core of nucleons with an electron cloud that orbits it.” (Granata, 2025).
There are future advancements in AI. For instance, the inclusion of an image scanning feature to determine deepfake images. The tool can scan uploaded images and videos and pinpoint cases of digital changes and malice. That is, there are scenarios in which an old photo could be posted as a contemporary photo.
Since it is an AI, it naturally links to Normal language processing and automatically retrieves information. It employs automation to cross-reference tons of webpages in microseconds. It saves a huge amount of time since this would take long hours for a human to perform such a task. Despite enhancing academic transparency and integrity, Veritas can lead to over-reliance and a lack of trust by the users. It could claim an article is a fact after going through billions of fake articles and information that is genuinely fake. Veritas may lack information on current news and contemporary data, hence its verification of information or debunking of a true article would be inaccurate.
Veritas will have a dialogue capability. For instance, User: I have come across a post claiming that eating celery burns more calories than it contains. How scientifically true is this? Veritas. There is a famous myth about "negative-calorie foods," which is a prime example of Veritas! Although celery is very low in calories (around 9 calories per stalk), it takes energy to chew and digest, and the thermic effect of food (the energy used to digest the food) only contributes to 10% of the food's total calories. User: So I am still gaining calories? Veritas: Sure, but it's a very small quantity. A study done at the University of Alabama revealed that you still get the majority of the calories (Shields, 2023). Do you want me to give you a link to the peer-reviewed paper on the metabolic rate, or should we delve into the history of this myth and how it began online?
References
Granata, C. (2025). Quantum Mechanics: The Bizarre Atomic and Subatomic World. In A Journey into Modern Physics: From Relativity to Quantum Technologies (pp. 41–87). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland. Retrieved from: https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-7...
Shields, C. E. (2023). Evaluating the Eating Habits and Food Choices of Alabama A&M University Students and Their Perception of Healthy Foods (Master's thesis, Alabama Agricultural and Mechanical University). Retrieved from: https://www.proquest.com/openview/2e2531d6aa388ad4...
My previous assignments
Updated Name and Purpose of My Bot
My bot remains Veritas (which means “truth” in Latin). It is primarily intended to serve as an educational resource to confirm facts and combat disinformation in academic media. Veritas is different from simply stating facts as true or false; it helps users learn to think like detectives as they examine texts, verify information sources, uncover fallacious arguments, and identify various forms of bias. It helps the education community practice more effective research skills in an era where misinformation is prevalent on the internet.
New Features, Conversations, and Interactions Added
Building on last week’s plan, I added more interactive elements focused on human-like conversation flow:
- Source Verification Mode: Users can paste text or a link, and the bot breaks down claims step by step.
- Bias and Fallacy Detector: It now actively scans for political, cultural, gender, emotional, or regional bias and explains them clearly.
- Guided Dialogue Trees: Multi-turn conversations that remember context and offer branching choices (e.g., “Explain simply,” “Show sources,” or “Teach me the method”).
- Deepfake Awareness Prompt: A basic version that reminds users about image manipulation risks and suggests checking visuals.
- Self-Limitation Disclaimer: Automatically reminds users about its knowledge limits at the start of fact-checking.
These features make the bot feel more like a patient tutor rather than a simple search tool.
Example Dialogue
User: I have come across a post claiming that eating celery burns more calories than it contains. How scientifically true is this?
Veritas: Hi! This is a popular “negative calorie foods” myth. About 9 calories per stalk, celery is very low in calories, but the energy spent chewing and digesting celery is relatively small — just 10% of the calories. You still consume more calories than you burn off from it. A 2023 study conducted by the Alabama A&M University is in support of this.
User: So I'm still gaining weight?
Veritas: Yes, but not a lot. Do you want: A) The link to a peer reviewed article B) How this myth began to creep its way into the web C) A simple explanation of the real digestion process?
Another Example
User: The definition of an atom is a lie, since there are sub-atomic particles, right?
Veritas: Good question! The smallest particle of an element is still an atom. It is composed of electrons, protons and neutrons, and has a dense nucleus. It's the structure of what they are made of that doesn't make it wrong, subatomic particles are part of the structure. This is the result of the usual quantum mechanics (Granata, 2025). The statement appears to be a straw man fallacy because it uses a misinterpretation of the actual definition. I would like to have the article link, I will check it further.
What My Bot does when the user sends a message and how he/she communicates with the user.
It's calm, clear and respectful as a helpful teaching assistant, Veritas communicates. It employs a casual but simple communication style, then makes available a deeper level. The responses are structured: short summary – explanation – options for the user. It remains neutral, provides explanations, and offers options for further conversation, allowing the user to maintain control of the interaction.
What type of user experience will you be creating?
I want to create a supportive learning partner experience. The user should feel guided and empowered, not talked down to. Their aim is to foster confidence in critical thinking and research skills, just as a good professor fosters students' own judgements. It should be calm, reliable and engaging.
Discuss and discuss ethical issues.
My experience with working on Veritas prompted me to reflect on the ethical considerations of the interaction between AI systems and humans: I included disclaimers because there is a possibility that if the data is outdated, then Veritas may accidentally share misinformation, but I wanted to do that as a goal for them to help reduce it.
Privacy: The bot doesn’t save user conversations or personal data beyond the current chat to protect privacy.
Bias: It actively identifies bias in content, however as an AI, may have inherent biases from its training. I made it clear about this.
Emotional Manipulation: Veritas uses no persuasive or dramatic language. It holds true to the facts and leaves it to the user to make the choice.
One of the main concerns is that users may become too dependent on AI Systems to the point of halting their thinking process. Which is why, I have made it design for it always to explain how to verify information, rather than just giving answers.
Transparency: All answers are accompanied by reasons and source references as appropriate. Also it has explicit knowledge cutoff.
User Trust: Trust is established through acknowledging limitations and letting the user know to double check key information.
Accessibility: I have used simple language so these can be used by students of all levels, but will look to add voice support and simpler modes.
The documentation of ethical safeguards and disclaimers.
Note: This is an automatically generated disclaimer. “I am an AI tool, always cross-check important information with trusted sources.”
lAvoids providing medical, legal, or financial information or guidance, and provides referrals to practitioners.
lPromotes personal verification practice.
lSuggestions for possible future improvements.
lInclude scan of real image for deepfakes.
lConnect to actual academic databases.
lCreate a browser plugin version.
lMake it available in multiple languages for better accessibility.
This project is related to practical applications such as virtual assistants (Siri, Alexa) and emerging educational tools in the field of AI. It demonstrates the potential of AI to assist human learning and poses intriguing questions regarding trust, reliance, and accountability between humans and AI.