The Most Accurate AI Content Detector
Try Our AI Detector
AI Studies

AI Detection Accuracy Studies — Meta-Analysis of 8 Studies

A comprehensive overview and meta-analysis of academic research and studies that demonstrate the exceptional performance of Originality.ai in detecting AI-generated text.

Trusted By Industry Leaders
Trusted By Industry Leaders

Introduction

Our text compare tool is a fantastic, lightweight tool that provides plagiarism checks between two documents. Whether you are a student, blogger or publisher, this tool offers a great solution to detect and compare similarities between any two pieces of text. In this article, I will discuss the different ways to use the tool, the primary features of the tool and who this tool is for. There is an FAQ at the bottom if you run into any issues when trying to use the tool.

What makes Originality.ai’s text comparison tool stand out?

Keyword density helper – This tool comes with a built-in keyword density helper in some ways similar to the likes of SurferSEO or MarketMuse the difference being, ours is free! This feature shows the user the frequency of single or two word keywords in a document, meaning you can easily compare an article you have written against a competitor to see the major differences in keyword densities. This is especially useful for SEO’s who are looking to optimize their blog content for search engines and improve the blog’s visibility.

Ways to compare

File compare – Text comparison between files is a breeze with our tool. Simply select the files you would like to compare, hit “Upload” and our tool will automatically insert the content into the text area, then simply hit “Compare” and let our tool show you where the differences in the text are. By uploading a file, you can still check the keyword density in your content.

URL compare

Comparing text between URLs is effortless with our tool. Simply paste the URL you would like to get the content from (in our example we use a fantastic blog post by Sherice Jacob found here) hit “Submit URL” and our tool will automatically retrieve the contents of the page and paste it into the text area, then simply click “Compare” and let our tool highlight the difference between the URLs. This feature is especially useful for checking keyword density between pages!

Simple text compare

You can also easily compare text by copying and pasting it into each field, as demonstrated below.

Features of Originality.ai’s Text Compare Tool

Ease of use

Our text compare tool is created with the user in mind, it is designed to be accessible to everyone. Our tool allows users to upload files or enter a URL to extract text, this along with the lightweight design ensures a seamless experience. The interface is simple and straightforward, making it easy for users to compare text and detect the diff.

Multiple text file format support

Our tool provides support for a variety of different text files and microsoft word formats including pdf file, .docx, .odt, .doc, and .txt, giving users the ability to compare text from different sources with ease. This makes it a great solution for students, bloggers, and publishers who are looking for file comparison in different formats.

Protects intellectual property

Our text comparison tool helps you protect your intellectual property and helps prevent plagiarism. This tool provides an accurate comparison of texts, making it easy to ensure that your work is original and not copied from other sources. Our tool is a valuable resource for anyone looking to maintain the originality of their content.

User Data Privacy

Our text compare tool is secure and protects user data privacy. No data is ever saved to the tool, the users’ text is only scanned and pasted into the tool’s text area. This makes certain that users can use our tool with confidence, knowing their data is safe and secure.

Compatibility

Our text comparison tool is designed to work seamlessly across all size devices, ensuring maximum compatibility no matter your screen size. Whether you are using a large desktop monitor, a small laptop, a tablet or a smartphone, this tool adjusts to your screen size. This means that users can compare texts and detect the diff anywhere without the need for specialized hardware or software. This level of accessibility makes it an ideal solution for students or bloggers who value the originality of their work and need to compare text online anywhere at any time.

In the many studies below looking at which AI detector is the most accurate, Originality.ai has consistently emerged as the most accurate AI text detector, outperforming various other tools. 

This article provides a meta-analysis of multiple research studies that showcase Originality.ai’s superior detection capabilities. These findings validate Originality.ai’s own AI detector accuracy study. They show that Originality.ai has outstanding performance when distinguishing AI-generated content from human-written text, demonstrating reliable third-party evidence of our efficacy. 

Key Findings (TL;DR)

Originality.ai AI Detector identified as the most effective in all 6 published 3rd party studies below

Originality.ai stands out as the most accurate tool for AI-generated text detection across multiple studies with high precision, recall, and overall accuracy. Originality.ai’s AI Content Checker has consistently outperformed other tools in detecting AI content and ensuring the authenticity of human-written text.

The following studies have been analyzed to assess the accuracy of AI-generated Text Detection Tools.

An Empirical Study of AI-Generated Detection Tools

The Effectiveness of Software Designed to Detect AI-Generated Writing: A Comparison of 16 AI Text Detectors

RAID: A Shared Benchmark for Robust Evaluation of Machine-Generated Text Detectors

The Great Detectives: Humans vs. AI Detectors in Catching Large Language Model-Generated Medical Writing

Characterizing the Increase in Artificial Intelligence Content Detection in Oncology Scientific Abstracts From 2021 to 2023

Students are using large language models and AI detectors can often detect their use

Exploring the Consequences of AI-Driven Academic Writing on Scholarly Practices

Recent Trend in Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Biomedical Publishing: A Quantitative Bibliometric Analysis

Study Publication Link: AI-Assisted Biomedical Publishing

Rankings

Study Title Originality.ai’s Accuracy Performance Highlights Key Competitors
An Empirical Study of AI-Generated Text Detection Tools 97% Highest true positives, Lowest false negatives GPTZero, Writer
The Effectiveness of Software Designed to Detect AI-Generated Writing: A Comparison of 16 AI Text Detectors 97% 100% accuracy on GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 papers Copyleaks, TurnItIn
RAID: A Shared Benchmark for Robust Evaluation of Machine-Generated Text Detectors 85% Most accurate across base and adversarial datasets, Exceptional performance on paraphrased content Binoculars, FastDetectGPT
The great detectives: humans versus AI detectors in catching large language model-generated medical writing 100% 100% accuracy on ChatGPT-generated and AI-rephrased articles ZeroGPT, GPT-2 Output Detector
Characterizing the Increase in AI Content Detection in Oncology Scientific Abstracts 96% 96% Accuracy for AI-generated (GPT-3.5, GPT-4) abstracts with over 95% sensitivity GPTZero, Sapling
Students are using large language models and AI detectors can often detect their use 91% Highest accuracy of 91% for Human vs AI and 82% for Human vs Disguised text GPTZero, ZeroGPT, Winston
Exploring the Consequences of AI-Driven Academic Writing on Scholarly Practices 96.6% Highest Mean Prediction Score of 96.5% for ChatGPT generated content and 96.7% for ChatGPT Revision of Human-authored content ContentDetector.AI, ZeroGPT, GPTZero, Winston.ai
Recent Trend in Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Biomedical Publishing: A Quantitative Bibliometric Analysis 97.6% AUC Excellent overall accuracy with an area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) of 97.6%. Originality.ai, Copyleaks, Crossplag, GPT-2 Output Detector, GPT Zero, and Writer.

Study Summaries

Study 1: An Empirical Study of AI-Generated Text Detection Tools

Based on An Empirical Study of AI-Generated Text Detection Tools, Originality.ai is the leading tool in detecting AI-generated text, achieving the highest accuracy rate of 97%, outperforming five other tools in identifying human-written content.

(Accuracy Comparison of AI Text Detection Tools on AH&AITD)

Key Findings

  • Accuracy: 97%
  • Precision: 98%
  • Recall: 96%
  • F1-score: 97%

Study Details

  • Tools Evaluated: Originality.ai, Zylalab, GPTKIT, GPTZero, Sapling, Writer
  • Dataset: 11,580 samples from AH&AITD dataset
  • Evaluation Criteria: Accuracy, Precision, Recall, F1 score, ROC curve, Confusion Matrix

Performance Highlights

  • Highest True Positives: 5,547
  • Lowest False Negatives: 243
  • Second Lowest False Positives: 94
  • Second Highest True Negatives: 5,696

Source

https://www.opastpublishers.com/peer-review/an-empirical-study-of-aigenerated-text-detection-tools-6354.html

Study 2: The Effectiveness of Software Designed to Detect AI-Generated Writing: A Comparison of 16 AI Text Detectors

According to this comprehensive study on “The Effectiveness of Software Designed to Detect AI-Generated Writing,” where 16 AI text detectors were evaluated, Originality.ai demonstrated remarkable accuracy identifying AI-generated content. It ranked as a top performer across GPT-3.5, GPT-4, and human-written papers with an overall accuracy of 97%.

(% of all 126 documents for which each detector gave correct, uncertain, or incorrect responses)

Key Findings

  • Overall Accuracy: 97%
  • GPT-3.5 Accuracy: 100%
  • GPT-4 Accuracy: 100%
  • Human Papers Accuracy: 95%

Study Details

  • Tools Evaluated: Originality.ai, Copyleaks, TurnItIn, Scribbr, ZeroGPT, Grammica, GPTZero, Crossplag, OpenAI, IvyPanda, GPT Radar, SEO.ai, Content at Scale, Writer, Sapling, ContentDetector.ai
  • Top Performers: Originality.ai, Copyleaks, TurnItIn
  • Dataset: 126 short papers/essays that were generated by AI or first-year college students.
  • Evaluation Criteria: Overall accuracy, accuracy with each type of document, decisiveness, the number of false positives, and the number of false negatives.

Performance Highlights

  • Overall Accuracy: Very high
  • Accuracy, GPT-3.5: Very high
  • Accuracy, GPT-4: Very high
  • Decisiveness: High
  • False Positives: Few
  • False Negatives: Few

Source

https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/opis-2022-0158/html

Study 3: RAID: A Shared Benchmark for Robust Evaluation of Machine-Generated Text Detectors

In the largest and most comprehensive study to date, RAID: A Shared Benchmark for Robust Evaluation of Machine-Generated Text Detectors, Originality.ai outperformed 11 leading AI detectors, achieving a remarkable accuracy of 85% on the base dataset and 96.7% on the paraphrased content in identifying AI-generated content. 

Key Findings

  • Base Dataset Accuracy: 85%
  • Adversarial Techniques: 1st in 9 out of 11 tests
  • Content Domains: 1st in 5 out of 8 domains
  • Paraphrased Content Accuracy: 96.7%

Study Details

  • Tools Evaluated:
    • Commercial: Originality.ai, GPTZero, Winston, ZeroGPT 
    • Metric-Based: GLTR, Binoculars, Fast DetectGPT, LLMDet 
    • Neural: RoBERTa-Base (GPT2), RoBERTaLarge (GPT2), RoBERTa-Base (ChatGPT), RADAR 
  • Dataset: 6,287,820 texts
  • Evaluation Criteria
    • 11 Types of Adversarial attacks (strategies to make text undetectable)
    • Accuracy at 5% False Positive Threshold for all tests 

Performance Highlights

  • Most Accurate AI Detector on Base Dataset
  • Most Accurate AI Detector on Adversarial Datasets
  • The Most Accurate AI Detector Across All Domains
  • Exceptional Performance on Paraphrased Content

Source

https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.07940

Study 4: The Great Detectives: Humans versus AI Detectors in Catching Large Language Model-generated Medical Writing

The study, The Great Detectives: Humans versus AI Detectors in Catching Large Language Model-generated Medical Writing, directly compares the accuracy of advanced AI detectors and human reviewers in detecting AI-generated medical writing after paraphrasing.

Six common AI content detectors and four human reviewers were employed to differentiate between the original and AI-generated articles. Originality AI emerged as the most sensitive and accurate platform for detecting AI-generated (including paraphrased) content.

(Accuracy of six AI content detectors in identifying AI-generated articles)

Key Findings

  • ChatGPT-Generated Articles Accuracy: 100%
  • AI-Rephrased Articles Accuracy: 100% 
  • Human evaluators performed worse than AI detectors

Study Details

  • Tools Evaluated
    • Six AI detectors: Originality.ai, TurnItIn, GPTZero, ZeroGPT, Content at Scale, GPT-2 Output Detector
    • Four Human Reviewers: Two student reviewers and Two professorial reviewers
  • Dataset: 150 texts (academic papers) 
  • Evaluation Criteria: AI score or Perplexity score

Performance Highlights

  • Only AI detector to identify 100% of AI Content
  • Only AI detector to identify 100% AI-Rephrased Content

Source

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40979-024-00155-6

Study 5: Characterizing the Increase in Artificial Intelligence Content Detection in Oncology Scientific Abstracts From 2021 to 2023

The study Characterizing the Increase in Artificial Intelligence Content Detection in Oncology Scientific Abstracts From 2021 to 2023 examines the effectiveness of three AI-content detectors (Originality.ai, GPTZero, and Sapling) in identifying AI-generated content in scientific abstracts submitted to the ASCO Annual Meetings from 2021 to 2023.

(Accuracy of AI content detectors in classifying human-written and AI-generated content)

Key Findings

  • Perfect AUROC scores of 1.00 for GPT-3.5 and nearly perfect for GPT-4
  • High AUPRC for distinguishing AI-generated from human-written abstracts

Study Details

  • Three Tools Evaluated: Originality.ai, GPTZero, Sapling
  • Dataset: 15,553 oncology scientific abstracts from ASCO Annual Meetings (2021-2023) 
  • Evaluation Criteria: AUPRC, AUROC, Brier Score

Performance Highlights

  • GPT-3.5 vs. Human: 99.7%
  • GPT-4 vs. Human: 98.7%
  • Mixed GPT-3.5 vs. Human: 87.8%
  • Mixed GPT-4 vs. Human: 81.5%

Source

https://ascopubs.org/doi/pdfdirect/10.1200/CCI.24.00077

Study 6: Students Are Using Large Language Models and AI Detectors Can Often Detect Their Use

The study Students are using large language models and AI detectors can often detect their use, aimed to explore how students use LLMs in their college work at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and evaluate the effectiveness of AI Detectors in identifying AI-generated text. 

They evaluated five AI detectors (Content at Scale, GPTZero, ZeroGPT, Winston, and Originality.ai, however, due to poor performance, Content at Scale was not further analyzed.

(Accuracy of AI content detectors)

Key Findings

  • Highest Accuracy of 91% for Human vs. AI and 82% for Human vs Disguised Text
  • Top F1 Score of 92% for Human vs. AI and a near-top score of 80% for Human vs. Disguised Text

Study Details

  • Three Tools Evaluated: Originality.ai, GPTZero, Winston, ZeroGPT
  • Dataset: 459 unique essays on the regulation of the tryptophan operon (human-written, AI-generated, disguised AI-generated) 
  • Evaluation Criteria: Accuracy, Precision, Recall, F1 score

Performance Highlights

  • Accuracy (Human vs. AI): 0.91
  • Precision  (Human vs. AI): 0.85
  • Recall (Human vs. AI): 1.0
  • F1 Score (Human vs. AI): 0.92
  • F1 Score (Human vs. Disguised): 0.80

Source

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2024.1374889/full

Study 7: Exploring the Consequences of AI-Driven Academic Writing on Scholarly Practices

The University of Florida study on AI detection in Academic Writing, “This Paper Was Written with the Help of ChatGPT: Exploring the Consequences of AI-Driven Academic Writing on Scholarly Practices,” aimed to explore the effectiveness of various AI content detection tools in differentiating between AI-generated content and human-written copy in academic writing. 

They evaluated five AI detectors (Originality.ai, ContentDetector.AI, ZeroGPT, GPTZero, and Winston.ai.

Key Findings

  • Highest Mean Prediction Scores in 4 out 5 Categories for two different datasets - GPTR (ChatGPT revision of Human-authored content) peaking at 99.3% in EDM and 94.10% in LAK dataset
  • Lowest Error Rate of 3.8% for EDM Dataset and 17.7% for LAK Dataset

Study Details

  • The Tools Evaluated: Originality.ai, ContentDetector.AI, ZeroGPT, GPTZero, and Winston.ai.
  • Dataset: Titles and Abstracts from the LAK22 and EDM2022 conference proceedings (Human-authored, ChatGPT (GPT-4-Turbo Model), ChatGPT Revision of Human-authored, 50% ChatGPT + 50% Human-authored, 50% Human-authored + 50% ChatGPT)
  • Evaluation Criteria: Mean Prediction Scores, Root Mean Square Error (RMSE), Area Under the Curve (AUC)

Performance Highlights

  • Mean Prediction Score (EDM Dataset): GPTR - 99.30%, GPT - 97.50%
  • Mean Prediction Score (LAK Dataset): GPTR - 94.10%, GPT - 95.50%
  • RSME (EDM Dataset): GPTR - 3.80%, GPT-10.10%
  • RSME (LAK Dataset): GPTR  - 17.70%, GPT - 17.20%

Source

https://educationaldatamining.org/edm2024/proceedings/2024.EDM-short-papers.55/2024.EDM-short-papers.55.pdf

Study 8: Recent Trend in Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Biomedical Publishing

The rise of AI-generated content in biomedical publishing has created a demand for reliable AI text detection tools. 

A recent bibliometric study, “Recent Trend in Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Biomedical Publishing: A Quantitative Bibliometric Analysis,” analyzed trends in AI-assisted content within peer-reviewed biomedical literature and compared the performance of various AI-detection tools. 

Originality.ai showed impressive results in this study, standing out with its superior accuracy and effectiveness compared to other AI detectors.

(Trends in published abstracts by the predicted probability of AI-generated text)

Key Findings

  • Originality.ai achieved 100% sensitivity and 95% specificity in detecting AI-generated content.
  • Originality.ai demonstrated excellent overall accuracy with an area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) of 97.6%.
  • AI-generated content in biomedical literature increased from 21.7% to 36.7% between 2020 and 2023, as detected by Originality.ai.

Study Details

  • Six Tools Evaluated: Originality.ai, Copyleaks, Crossplag, GPT-2 Output Detector, GPT Zero, and Writer
  • Dataset: Abstracts from peer-reviewed journals indexed in MEDLINE between 2020 and 2023.
    • 390 randomized controlled trial abstracts from MEDLINE — randomly (30 abstracts per quarter) selected between January 2020 and March 2023. 
    • 60 abstracts — generated using ChatGPT to test the sensitivity of the AI detectors.
    • 60 abstracts — selected from the 1980s, when AI usage was minimal, were used to test specificity.
  • Evaluation Criteria
    • Sensitivity (the ability to correctly detect AI-generated text).
    • Specificity (the ability to correctly identify human-generated text).
    • Overall accuracy (represented by the AUC).

Performance Highlights

  • Finding 1: Originality.ai achieved 100% sensitivity in detecting AI-generated abstracts.
  • Finding 2: Originality.ai demonstrated 95% specificity, correctly identifying human-written abstracts with minimal false positives.
  • Finding 3: Originality.ai showed strong discriminatory ability with an AUC of 97.6%.

Source

https://assets.cureus.com/uploads/review_article/pdf/158398/20230618-14395-7fhu27.pdf

Further Reading

We conducted an analysis based on the third-party study “ESPERANTO: Evaluating Synthesized Phrases to Enhance Robustness in AI Detection for Text Origination,” accessible through Cornell University. While the authors didn't include Originality.ai in the original study, we ran a comparative analysis using the study's dataset to evaluate the robustness of the Originality.ai AI detector.

Our analysis with the ESPERANTO dataset found that Originality.ai demonstrated a robust performance and strong resilience to back-translation. Read the full results of our Originality.ai with the ESPRANTO dataset here.

Jonathan Gillham

Founder / CEO of Originality.ai I have been involved in the SEO and Content Marketing world for over a decade. My career started with a portfolio of content sites, recently I sold 2 content marketing agencies and I am the Co-Founder of MotionInvest.com, the leading place to buy and sell content websites. Through these experiences I understand what web publishers need when it comes to verifying content is original. I am not For or Against AI content, I think it has a place in everyones content strategy. However, I believe you as the publisher should be the one making the decision on when to use AI content. Our Originality checking tool has been built with serious web publishers in mind!

Frequently Asked Questions

Do I have to fill out the entire form?

No, that’s one of the benefits, only fill out the areas which you think will be relevant to the prompts you require.

Why is the English so poor for some prompts?

When making the tool we had to make each prompt as general as possible to be able to include every kind of input. Not to worry though ChatGPT is smart and will still understand the prompt.

In The Press

Originality.ai has been featured for its accurate ability to detect GPT-3, Chat GPT and GPT-4 generated content. See some of the coverage below…

View All Press
Featured by Leading Publications

Originality.ai did a fantastic job on all three prompts, precisely detecting them as AI-written. Additionally, after I checked with actual human-written textual content, it did determine it as 100% human-generated, which is important.

Vahan Petrosyan

searchenginejournal.com

I use this tool most frequently to check for AI content personally. My most frequent use-case is checking content submitted by freelance writers we work with for AI and plagiarism.

Tom Demers

searchengineland.com

After extensive research and testing, we determined Originality.ai to be the most accurate technology.

Rock Content Team

rockcontent.com

Jon Gillham, Founder of Originality.ai came up with a tool to detect whether the content is written by humans or AI tools. It’s built on such technology that can specifically detect content by ChatGPT-3 — by giving you a spam score of 0-100, with an accuracy of 94%.

Felix Rose-Collins

ranktracker.com

ChatGPT lacks empathy and originality. It’s also recognized as AI-generated content most of the time by plagiarism and AI detectors like Originality.ai

Ashley Stahl

forbes.com

Originality.ai Do give them a shot! 

Sri Krishna

venturebeat.com

For web publishers, Originality.ai will enable you to scan your content seamlessly, see who has checked it previously, and detect if an AI-powered tool was implored.

Industry Trends

analyticsinsight.net

Frequently Asked Questions

Why is it important to check for plagiarism?

Tools for conducting a plagiarism check between two documents online are important as it helps to ensure the originality and authenticity of written work. Plagiarism undermines the value of professional and educational institutions, as well as the integrity of the authors who write articles. By checking for plagiarism, you can ensure the work that you produce is original or properly attributed to the original author. This helps prevent the distribution of copied and misrepresented information.

What is Text Comparison?

Text comparison is the process of taking two or more pieces of text and comparing them to see if there are any similarities, differences and/or plagiarism. The objective of a text comparison is to see if one of the texts has been copied or paraphrased from another text. This text compare tool for plagiarism check between two documents has been built to help you streamline that process by finding the discrepancies with ease.

How do Text Comparison Tools Work?

Text comparison tools work by analyzing and comparing the contents of two or more text documents to find similarities and differences between them. This is typically done by breaking the texts down into smaller units such as sentences or phrases, and then calculating a similarity score based on the number of identical or nearly identical units. The comparison may be based on the exact wording of the text, or it may take into account synonyms and other variations in language. The results of the comparison are usually presented in the form of a report or visual representation, highlighting the similarities and differences between the texts.

String comparison is a fundamental operation in text comparison tools that involves comparing two sequences of characters to determine if they are identical or not. This comparison can be done at the character level or at a higher level, such as the word or sentence level.

The most basic form of string comparison is the equality test, where the two strings are compared character by character and a Boolean result indicating whether they are equal or not is returned. More sophisticated string comparison algorithms use heuristics and statistical models to determine the similarity between two strings, even if they are not exactly the same. These algorithms often use techniques such as edit distance, which measures the minimum number of operations (such as insertions, deletions, and substitutions) required to transform one string into another.

Another common technique for string comparison is n-gram analysis, where the strings are divided into overlapping sequences of characters (n-grams) and the frequency of each n-gram is compared between the two strings. This allows for a more nuanced comparison that takes into account partial similarities, rather than just exact matches.

String comparison is a crucial component of text comparison tools, as it forms the basis for determining the similarities and differences between texts. The results of the string comparison can then be used to generate a report or visual representation of the similarities and differences between the texts.

What is Syntax Highlighting?

Syntax highlighting is a feature of text editors and integrated development environments (IDEs) that helps to visually distinguish different elements of a code or markup language. It does this by coloring different elements of the code, such as keywords, variables, functions, and operators, based on a predefined set of rules.

The purpose of syntax highlighting is to make the code easier to read and understand, by drawing attention to the different elements and their structure. For example, keywords may be colored in a different hue to emphasize their importance, while comments or strings may be colored differently to distinguish them from the code itself. This helps to make the code more readable, reducing the cognitive load of the reader and making it easier to identify potential syntax errors.

How Can I Conduct a Plagiarism Check between Two Documents Online?

With our tool it’s easy, just enter or upload some text, click on the button “Compare text” and the tool will automatically display the diff between the two texts.

What Are the Benefits of Using a Text Compare Tool?

Using text comparison tools is much easier, more efficient, and more reliable than proofreading a piece of text by hand. Eliminate the risk of human error by using a tool to detect and display the text difference within seconds.

What Files Can You Inspect with This Text Compare Tool?

We have support for the file extensions .pdf, .docx, .odt, .doc and .txt. You can also enter your text or copy and paste text to compare.

Will My Data Be Shared?

There is never any data saved by the tool, when you hit “Upload” we are just scanning the text and pasting it into our text area so with our text compare tool, no data ever enters our servers.

Software License Agreement

Copyright © 2023, Originality.ai

All rights reserved.

Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met:

  1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.

  1. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.

THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS “AS IS” AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT HOLDER OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

Will My Data Be Shared?

This table below shows a heat map of features on other sites compared to ours as you can see we almost have greens across the board!

More From The Blog

Al Content Detector & Plagiarism Checker for Marketers and Writers

Use our leading tools to ensure you can hit publish with integrity!