Ibigize - ku
i - Imisusire in Umwandiko Nka MukusanyaKDE - Nta na rimwe A - Hejuru "% S" Igiteranyo. ni, na Twebwe Herekana% S Bya.
0 Amagambo
in Rimwe - Umwandiko ni OYA. Oya Urubuga: Shakisha; ya: Umwandiko Koresha i Mugenzura....
iyi Itangira: - Iyandika ni OYA, na iyi OYA. - Ishusho in Umwandiko - OYA.:,,, Cyangwa -, na A Umuhimbyi. Koresha iyi Nka ya:.
i
OYA
- - Uburebure, Urugero: -, - Kuri hagati Umunyamuntu na.
Nta na rimwe
ni Oya Kuri Guhindura... Iyandika Imisusire A. Twebwe Herekana% S A na i, na - OYA Umubare.
ni
,,, Cyangwa - Iyandika "- Nka" Kuri Icyo ari cyo cyose. A Nka Cyangwa ya:.
Ibibazo bizwa kenshi
No AI detector is reliable, and we will not pretend this one is. It reports stylometric signals - patterns that are common in generated text, like unusually uniform sentence length - not proof. We show you the individual signals so you can judge them, and we show a band, never a fake precise percentage.
Because that number would be invented. There is no honest way to turn writing style into a calibrated probability that a specific passage was AI-written. Tools that show a confident percentage are giving you false precision - the same reason our plagiarism checker never claims a made-up accuracy figure.
Yes, and often. Careful, formal, or heavily-edited writing, technical documentation, and text by non-native English writers all tend to trip the same signals as generated text. Treat a "possibly AI" band as a prompt to look closer, never as an accusation.
The plagiarism checker compares your text against the live web to find copied passages. This tool looks only at writing style to flag patterns common in AI output - it does no web search. They answer different questions; use both, and trust neither as sole proof.
No. AI-signal analysis runs locally on our server in a single pass and the text is not saved to any report or database - it is only used to compute the signals shown back to you.