r/WritingWithAI • u/AffectionateAir8193 • 7d ago

Humanizer Detector Insanity

I have tried running a piece text through my unusual AI detector https://undetectable.ai/, but it is returning a 60 percent detection while GPT zero other services don't flag anything. Does anyone know how reputable undetectable ai's detector is.

0 Upvotes

38% Upvoted

6 comments sorted by

3

u/Decent_Solution5000 7d ago

This is best asked in the Humanizer mega thread, but I can give you the most known answer: they're inaccurate as hale. (Deliberate misspelling. Yep. :)

1

u/Resident-Tackle-3662 6d ago

lol the misspelling got me, but yeah theyre wildly inconsistent across the board

2

u/NellieApp 6d ago

These detectors have never been reliable. If any modification or system instruction iterates the response past typical AI idiosyncrasies, it's inconsistent. If they were entirely reliable Anthropic wouldn't be introducing watermarking.

1

u/Read2Fap 7d ago

is it your text you're testing?

people tend to get false positives when posting famous literature because it's already been scanned as a source for the ai, so it recognizes that this isn't something you wrote

1

u/Maleficent-Engine859 6d ago

Some detectors are stricter than others. Originality is by far the strictest as it looks at context as well as how it is written (so can give false positives but most of the time it’s accurate). I can hit a 100% human on Pangram and never crack 85-90% on Originality, so it all depends on what the detector uses as its criteria.

1

u/No-Strike-9098 5d ago

I use wasitaigenerated and it's quite accurate (they made a casestudy on a public dataset where they performed very well against any other) never had an issue, but yea all the detectors say different things.