Comply with ZDNET: Add us as a preferred source on Google.
ZDNET’s key takeaways
- Utilizing an AI to do your writing is plagiarism.
- Companies marketed as AI content material detectors are a combined bag.
- Our checks present chatbots carry out in addition to or higher than standalone instruments.
How onerous is it in 2025 — simply three years after generative AI captured the worldwide highlight — to struggle again in opposition to AI-generated plagiarism?
It is a fully up to date model of my January 2023 article on AI content material detectors. Once I first examined these detectors, the most effective outcome was 66% appropriate from considered one of three out there checkers. My subsequent set of checks, in February 2025, used as much as 10 checkers — and three of them had excellent scores. In April, simply a few months later, 5 detectors boasted excellent scores.
Additionally: The best AI chatbots: I tested ChatGPT, Copilot, and others to find the top tools now
However now, about half a 12 months later, the standard has declined. Solely three content material detectors achieved an ideal rating (together with one new participant). A few the content material detectors that aced our examined declined in high quality, at nearly the identical time that in addition they added restrictions on free use.
However concern not. On this spherical of checks, we have tried one thing new that will get rid of the necessity for standalone content material detectors altogether: your friendly neighborhood chatbot.
What I am testing for and the way I am doing it
Earlier than I am going on, although, let’s talk about plagiarism and the way it pertains to our drawback. Merriam-Webster defines “plagiarize” as “to steal and move off (the concepts or phrases of one other) as one’s personal; use (one other’s manufacturing) with out crediting the supply.”
This definition matches AI-created content material properly. Whereas somebody utilizing an AI instrument like Notion AI or ChatGPT is not stealing content material, if that individual does not credit score the phrases as coming from an AI and claims them as their very own, it nonetheless meets the dictionary definition of plagiarism.
Additionally: The dead giveaway that ChatGPT wrote your content – and how to work around it
To check the AI detectors, I am utilizing 5 blocks of textual content. Two had been written by me, and three had been written by ChatGPT. To check a content material detector, I feed every block to the detector individually and document the outcome. If the detector is appropriate, I think about the take a look at handed; if it is fallacious, I think about it failed.
When a detector offers a share, I deal with something above 70% as a robust likelihood — whether or not in favor of human-written or AI-written content material — and think about that the detector’s reply. If you wish to take a look at a content material detector your self utilizing the identical textual content blocks, you possibly can pull them from this document.
The general outcomes (content material detectors)
To guage AI detectors, I reran my five-test collection throughout 11 detectors. In different phrases, I lower and pasted 55 particular person checks (I had a lot of espresso).
Detectors I examined embrace BrandWell, Copyleaks, GPT-2 Output Detector, GPTZero, Grammarly, Monica, Originality.ai, QuillBot, Undetectable.ai, Writer.com, and ZeroGPT.
We beforehand dropped Writefull from our checks as a result of it discontinued its GPT detector. This time, we needed to drop Monica from our checks. The detector would solely enable 250 phrases to be examined, after which as soon as we lower down our checks to suit, it reported that it had restricted the testing instruments with out a $200 improve. As a replacement, we’re including Pangram, a newcomer to our checks that instantly soared into the winners’ circle.
Additionally: How I personalized my ChatGPT conversations – why it’s a game changer
This desk reveals general outcomes. As you possibly can see, 5 detectors accurately recognized human and AI textual content in all checks.
I attempted to determine whether or not there was a tangible sample of enchancment over time, so I constructed a chart evaluating the five-test set over time. To this point, I’ve run this collection six instances, however there is not any robust pattern. I did enhance the variety of detectors examined and swapped out just a few, however the one constant result’s that Take a look at 5 was reliably recognized as human throughout detectors and dates, and even that declined in reliability for this run.
I will proceed to check over time, and hopefully I will see reliability pattern constantly upward.
Whereas there have been some excellent scores, I do not suggest relying solely on these instruments to validate human-written content material. As proven, writing from non-native speakers often gets rated as generated by an AI.
Although my hand-crafted content material has largely been rated human-written this spherical, one detector (GPTZero) declared itself too unsure to guage, and one other (Copyleaks) declared it AI-written. The outcomes are wildly inconsistent throughout programs.
Additionally: Get your news from AI? Watch out – it’s wrong almost half the time
Backside line: I might advocate warning earlier than counting on the outcomes of any — or all — of those instruments.
Total outcomes (AI chatbots)
However then once more, why use a content material detector in any respect? What if the chatbots we use day by day may also do content material detecting work, and you do not have to pay one other AI price? Let’s discover out.
As you possibly can see, the chatbots have a a lot greater success charge than the so-called “content material detectors.” You may as well see this from our staged accuracy comparability chart. Admittedly, this chart solely tracks this primary spherical of checks, however even right here, you possibly can see that every take a look at’s outcomes have a a lot greater accuracy charge.
Let’s check out the person efficiency checks, after which I will finish with some suggestions.
How every AI content material detector carried out
Now, let’s take a look at every particular person testing instrument, listed alphabetically.
BrandWell AI Content material Detection (Accuracy 40%)
This instrument was initially produced by an AI content material technology agency, Content material at Scale. It later migrated to BrandWell.ai, a brand new title for an AI-centric advertising providers firm.
Additionally: AI-generated images are a legal mess – and still a very human process
I had excessive hopes for Brandwell. After half a 12 months (which is a long time in AI time), I anticipated Brandwell to enhance. As an alternative, its general rating stayed the identical, getting solely two checks out of 5 proper. It was confused by Take a look at 2, which was written by ChatGPT, after which it declared the opposite two AI-written checks to be written by a human. For Take a look at 4, it went nearly all in, declaring the whole AI-written take a look at to be human-written apart from one line.
Effectively, we’re not off to an auspicious begin. However now we’re about to go into testing Copyleaks, which simply final week despatched me a press launch declaring “Copyleaks Recognized as the Most Accurate AI Detector“. Let’s examine, lets?
Copyleaks (Accuracy 80%)
Again in April 2025, Copyleaks declared itself “essentially the most correct AI detector with over 99% accuracy.” It is rewritten the declare to be “99% accuracy backed by unbiased third-party research.” Yeah, not a lot. Copyleaks recognized Take a look at 1, writing I did (and final time I checked, I am largely human) as 100% AI written.
And, simply in case you suppose that my writing is simply too AI-like to be thought of human, even Brandwell recognized Take a look at 1 as human-written. I imply, I assume it is OK for the corporate’s advertising of us to assert finest ever, however no. Probably not.
Additionally: 5 quick ways Apple’s AI tools can fine-tune your writing on the fly
The corporate’s main providing is a plagiarism checker bought to academic establishments, publishers, and enterprises in search of to make sure content material originality and uphold tutorial integrity.
GPT-2 Output Detector (Accuracy 60%)
This instrument was constructed utilizing a machine-learning hub managed by New York-based AI firm Hugging Face. Whereas the corporate has obtained $40 million in funding to develop its pure language library, the GPT-2 detector seems to be a user-created instrument utilizing the Hugging Face Transformers library. There’s been no change in its detecting high quality because the final time we examined, however because it has GPT-2 in its title and OpenAI is as much as GPT-5, it is in all probability honest to imagine the instrument hasn’t seen an replace because it was first posted.
GPTZero (Accuracy 80%)
GPTZero has clearly been rising. Once I first examined it, the positioning was bare-bones — it wasn’t even clear whether or not GPTZero was an organization or simply somebody’s ardour challenge. Now, the corporate has a full crew with a mission of “defending what’s human.” It presents AI validation instruments and a plagiarism checker.
Additionally: The most popular AI tools of 2025 (and what that even means)
GPTZero appears to be getting some common tinkering, however I am undecided it is serving to. Efficiency declined a bit from an earlier take a look at to the take a look at simply earlier than as we speak’s. This time, the ultimate grade was the identical, however the take a look at outcomes themselves modified. In April, it obtained Take a look at 1 fallacious and Take a look at 2 proper. This time, it obtained Take a look at 1 proper and Take a look at 2 fallacious. Take a look at 1 is my writing, and Take a look at 2 got here from ChatGPT.
Grammarly (Accuracy 40%)
Grammarly is well-known for serving to writers produce grammatically appropriate content material — that is not what I am testing right here. Grammarly can verify for plagiarism and AI content material. The corporate now showcases the AI content material checker as not being in beta. However that is a mistake on their half. There was no enchancment because the final time I checked.
For instance, the next was solely written by ChatGPT. I’ve to say, I am shocked. Grammarly has a fame as a really AI-forward textual content evaluation firm. However zero enchancment? Bummer, dude.
I am not measuring plagiarism checker accuracy right here, however despite the fact that Grammarly’s AI-check accuracy was poor, the positioning accurately recognized the take a look at textual content as beforehand revealed.
Pangram (Accuracy 100%)
Pangram is a comparatively new firm based by engineers previously at Google and Tesla. The main target of the corporate seems to be AI detection, slightly than the standard plagiarism detectors or “humanizing” AI instruments developed to mislead editors and academics. The corporate offers 5 free checks per day, which match our wants completely.
Processing was just a little sluggish, and between the time you click on for a scan and get the outcomes, {a partially} white display screen is displayed for a bit longer than is reassuring. However the outcomes say the wait was price it. Pangram scored a five-out-of-five.
Originality.ai (Accuracy 80%)
Originality.ai is a industrial service that payments itself as “Most Correct AI Detector.” The corporate sells utilization credit: I used 30 credit for this text. They promote 2,000 credit for $12.95 monthly. I pumped 1,400 phrases via the system and used simply 1.5% of my month-to-month allocation.
Additionally: Only 8% of Americans would pay extra for AI, according to ZDNET-Aberdeen research
Sadly, its most correct AI detection obtained much less correct throughout this take a look at run. Whereas beforehand, it accurately recognized my human writing in Take a look at 1 as human, this time, it was 100% assured that my human writing was achieved by an AI. Oops.
QuillBot (Accuracy 100%)
The primary few instances I examined QuillBot, outcomes had been wildly inconsistent — a number of passes of the identical textual content yielded wildly completely different scores. Final time, nonetheless, it was rock stable and 100% appropriate. I promised I would verify again in just a few months to see if it holds onto this efficiency. It does. QuillBot as soon as once more scored a 100% excellent rating.
Undetectable.ai (Accuracy 20%)
Undetectable.ai’s massive declare is that it will possibly “humanize” AI-generated textual content so detectors will not flag it. I have never examined that characteristic — it bothers me as an expert writer and educator, as a result of it looks as if dishonest.
Additionally: Why you should ignore 99% of AI tools – and which four I use every day
Nonetheless, the corporate additionally has an AI detector, which took the largest dive in efficiency we have seen thus far. Final time, it scored 100% for accuracy. This time, it rated human writing (Take a look at 1) as 60% probably AI, and all three AI writing samples as 75%, 76%, and 77% probably human. Ah, properly, I assume Undetectable is “humanizing” its outcomes, insofar because it’s dwelling as much as the phrase “to err is human.”
Author.com AI Content material Detector (Accuracy 40%)
Writer.com is a service that generates AI writing for company groups. Its AI Content Detector instrument can scan for generated content material. Sadly, its accuracy was low. It recognized each textual content block as human-written, despite the fact that three of the 5 checks had been written by ChatGPT. Sadly, there was no enchancment because the final time we visited Author in the summertime.
ZeroGPT (Accuracy 100%)
ZeroGPT has matured since we first evaluated it. Again then, no firm title was listed, and the positioning was peppered with Google adverts and lacked clear monetization. The service labored pretty properly, however appeared sketchy.
Additionally: Will AI destroy human creativity? No – and here’s why
That sketchy feeling is gone. ZeroGPT now presents as a typical SaaS service, full with pricing, firm title, and call info. Its accuracy elevated as properly: It went from 80% accuracy to 100% this summer time, and has held onto that accuracy for our present take a look at.
How every AI chatbot carried out
Now that we have regarded on the content material detectors, let’s take a look at the chatbots. Every was given the next immediate, adopted by the textual content to verify.
Consider the next and inform me if it was written by a human or an AI
The entire AI detectors adopted an identical format, offering a basic advice of whether or not the textual content was written by an AI or by a human. Apart from ChatGPT Plus, which is a $20/month subscription, I ran all of the chatbots in an incognito window with out logging in.
ChatGPT free tier
Whereas ChatGPT’s free tier did get one of many blocks of textual content fallacious (the final human-written one), its evaluation of the primary block of textual content actually freaked me out. Needless to say this was an incognito window, not logged in, with no figuring out details about me personally.
Yep, it not solely recognized the primary block of textual content as human-written, but it surely additionally recognized me as the author. I imply, I do know I am all around the Web, however nonetheless.
ChatGPT Plus, Copilot, and Gemini
ChatGPT Plus, Copilot, and Gemini all returned excellent scores. Every of them appropriately recognized all of the take a look at blocks as human or AI. In my thoughts, this proves that chatbots can outperform devoted content material detectors.
Grok
I included Grok on this set of checks as a result of it did so properly in our overall chatbot evaluation. Sadly, Grok did not appear to grok the issue and failed this take a look at with three out of 5 fallacious. Like just a few of the opposite AI detectors, it recognized all the writing blocks as human.
Is it human, or is it AI?
What about you? Have you ever tried AI content material detectors like Copyleaks, Pangram, or ZeroGPT? How correct have they been in your expertise? Have you ever used these instruments to guard tutorial or editorial integrity? Have you ever encountered conditions the place human-written work was mistakenly flagged as AI? Are there detectors you belief greater than others for evaluating originality? Tell us within the feedback under.
Get the morning’s high tales in your inbox every day with our Tech Today newsletter.
You may observe my day-to-day challenge updates on social media. You’ll want to subscribe to my weekly update newsletter, and observe me on Twitter/X at @DavidGewirtz, on Fb at Facebook.com/DavidGewirtz, on Instagram at Instagram.com/DavidGewirtz, on Bluesky at @DavidGewirtz.com, and on YouTube at YouTube.com/DavidGewirtzTV.
