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.
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.
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!
You can also easily compare text by copying and pasting it into each field, as demonstrated below.
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.
This study looks at SI.com and how much AI content exists on the Review sections of their site.
It was recently reported that fake authors with AI-generated headshots had written reviews that were suspected of being AI-generated.
The ArenaGroup (which owns Sports Illustrated) contracted with AdVon commerce to create review articles for a separate section of their site using a strategy often called “parasite SEO”.
“Parasite SEO” is when a company with a reputable domain (such as Sports Illustrated) partners with a content provider to create articles (“parasites”) that can rank well in Google because of the reputable domain (“host”). The quality of the content might be lower than other sites but because of the authority of the domain, in the eyes of Google the content will rank well. In the case of the articles at SI.com they made money from visitors who followed the recommendation of the SI.com article and purchased a product via an affiliate link.
These review articles were published at si.com/review/ under multiple fake author names.
As of June 17, 2022 the SI.com/review site was redirected to the similar SI.com/showcase section of SI.com.
On the showcase section of the site, SI.com makes it clear that their editorial staff are not involved in the creation of this content:
SI makes it clear that they earn money as an affiliate referring people to purchase products - https://www.minutemedia.com/policies/terms-and-conditions-si
Questions Remain…
It is clear that authors were faked but… was AI used to generate these review articles?
The source states “‘The content is absolutely AI-generated,’ the second source said, ‘no matter how much they say that it's not.’”
Sports Illustrated and AdVon’s statement says all content was human-generated:
“AdVon has assured us that all of the articles in question were written and edited by humans. According to AdVon, their writers, editors, and researchers create and curate content and follow a policy that involves using both counter-plagiarism and counter-AI software on all content”
We know fake people were used to create reviews, but further questions need to be answered…
That is what we are going to look into.
Specifically, looking at the use of AI at the 2 product review sections of SI.com
The article identified in the Futurism article written by a fake author “Play Like a Pro With The Best Full-Size Volleyballs” when run through an AI checker comes back with 100% confidence the introduction was AI-generated (see scan).
We will explore 2 parts of SI.com. Specifically their review sub-sites at…
Method for SI.com/Review
Method for SI.com/Showcase
As mentioned above we identified all URLs at both the older SI.com/review section of SI (using archive.org) and the new review article section of SI.com at SI.com/showcase.
Then analyzed specific sections using Originality.ai AI detection of each article:
We split each article into sections because an introduction being AI written is potentially less concerning to a reader when compared to online reviews being AI-generated.
Most articles follow a similar format shown below…
261 review article URLs at SI.com/Review were able to have their content from Archive.org analyzed using the AI checker at Originality.ai.
Most of these articles were published and likely written from mid 2021 to mid 2022. Although ChatGPT was not yet launched, many other AI writing tools such as Jasper.ai were available during this period of time AI detection and widespread adoption was significantly less prevalent during this time.
Below we show the % of articles that were suspected of being AI-Written vs Human-Written for each section:
Findings…
Shockingly, almost 70% of the introductions are suspected of being AI-generated!
It looks highly likely that an AI writing tool using GPT-3 such as Jasper.ai was used for the creation of a meaningful number of the Review articles.
Could these be false positives? Unlikely, as our false positive rate is tested to be ~2.5% - see accuracy study here.
Potentially the editorial standards at the old SI.com/review section of the site were different and the new SI.com/showcase section of the site requires reviews to be human-written with more controls in place.
There is significantly more data for us to review with SI.com/showcase since the site was launched in the middle of 2022 and is still live.
986 Review articles at SI.com/Showcase were analyzed and below are the findings…
AI appears to be used in both the introduction and article body.
I think the BIG finding from this study is that there is minimal/no sign of AI being used to write the product “review” section of each article. SI.com and their contracted 3rd party editorial team seem to have effectively implemented controls to ensure at least the product review portion of the articles are written by humans.
In today’s online society, a question all publishers need to wrestle is: “When is it okay to use and not disclose that content is AI-generated.”
Arena Group is not alone in allowing AI-written content to be published on their sites!
In fact we completed another study looking at 16 large publishers using AI writing like the Arena Group, Vox Media, DotDash Meredith, Conde Nast, etc that have 165 websites which dominate Google. 45% of the websites had statistically significant amounts of AI generated content on them.
See Extent of AI Writing on Large Publishers - Study
No, that’s one of the benefits, only fill out the areas which you think will be relevant to the prompts you require.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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:
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.
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!
