Àwọn ààyè-iṣẹ́ AI - àìdájú àwọn ààyè-iṣẹ́

Wó àwọn àmì-ìwé ìṣàmúlò-ètò ìwégbègbè nínú àkọ́lé rẹ̀ bí àwọn àwọn ààyè àìdálẹ̀ - kò jẹ́ àwọn ààyè "82% AI" tí a tí kọ̀. Àwọn ààyè AI kò ní igbẹ́kẹle, a tí ṣàfihàn ọ̀rọ̀ kan nípa àwọn ààyè àìdálẹ̀.

0 Àwọn Àmì-àṣírí

Àwọn ìṣàmúlò-ètò tí a lò ní pàtó nínú àwọn ìṣàmúlò-ètò - àyọkà rẹ̀ kò wa ní pàtó. Àtòjọ-ẹ̀yàn yìí kò jẹ́ ìṣàfihàn wẹ́ẹ̀bù; fún àyọkà àkọ́lé lò Àwọn ìṣàmúlò-ètò ìṣàmúlò-ètò.

Ka yìí ní akọkọ: Àwọn ààyè ìṣàfihàn àkọ́lé AI kò jẹ́ ìròyìn, àti àtòjọ-ẹ̀yàn yìí kò jẹ́ àwọn ààyè. Ò sọ́kalẹ̀ àwọn ààyè stylometric - àwọn à

Àwọn ààtò àwọn àmì-ìwé

Stylometry, kò jẹ́ magic

A ti ṣe iṣiro awọn abuda ti a mọ daradara - bii o ṣe le yatọ si gigun ọrọ, awọn ọrọ-ọrọ ti o fẹran, awọn ibẹrẹ ti o yipada - ti o ni iyatọ laarin eniyan ati awọn ọrọ ti a ṣe.

Àwọn ààyè-iṣẹ́, kò gba àwọn ìpéwọ̀n àìdá

Kò ní ọna kan tí a lè fi àwọn

Àwọn ìṣàfarawé àwọn ìṣàmúlò-ètò jẹ́ àwọn ìṣàmúlò-ètò ìṣàfarawé

[Translation temporarily unavailable. Please try again.]

Àwọn Àtòjọ-ẹ̀yàn

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.

Àwọn ààyè-iṣẹ́ AI - àìdájú àwọn ààyè-iṣẹ́

Àwọn ààtò àwọn àmì-ìwé

Stylometry, kò jẹ́ magic

Àwọn ààyè-iṣẹ́, kò gba àwọn ìpéwọ̀n àìdá

Àwọn ìṣàfarawé àwọn ìṣàmúlò-ètò jẹ́ àwọn ìṣàmúlò-ètò ìṣàfarawé

Àwọn Àtòjọ-ẹ̀yàn

Is this AI detector accurate?

Why don't you give a percentage like "82% AI"?

Can it wrongly flag human writing?

How is this different from the plagiarism checker?

Do you store the text I analyze here?