Absolutely. From the article: the software detected 0/6 cheating students, while a human detected 1/6 cheating students.

Frankly, with such low numbers, I would not draw any conclusion at all. Within the margin of error, the human could have detected 0, or maybe 2 cheating students. Who knows. It would change this results dramatically, so you can basically ignore them.

Also, the cherry on the cake is that the human also detected one cheating student who wasn't cheating. So human vs. software, no one wins.