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.
In November 2023, the AI, and at a larger scale, the tech world was feverishly consumed by news of an incipient coup staged by the Open AI (the organization behind ChatGPT) board of directors. Ultimately, that coup failed to result in executive reform. Still, it did provide the perfect opportunity for one of its biggest competitors, Anthropic, to draw attention to its own LLM (large language model). As a result, on Tuesday, Nov 21st, 2023, Anthropic announced grand updates to its AI model, Claude. Considering the enthusiastic market response, we will look at the many developing trends and statistics behind Claude AI.
Claude, is an AI (artificial intelligence) based assistant developed by Anthropic using their research into HHH (Helpful, Honest, Harmless) AI applications. The assistant can be accessed through a chatbot at www.claude.ai or an API (Application Programming Interface) through Anthropic’s developer console. Below, we will explore the interesting data behind Claude AI including development trends, performance metrics, applications and user statistics.
Since its inception, Claude has gone through a few upgrades and different iterations:
Anthropic has also released a streamlined and faster model with limited capabilities, called Claude Instant. This model has seen a similar development cycle as seen below:
As mentioned earlier, within the past month, Anthropic has released an upgraded version of their leading AI model, Claude 2.1. Having also made advancements in their Claude Instant model within the last quarter, Anthropic has set its mark as a technical leader in the AI space. Below we can see different stats detailing the capabilities achieved by Claude AI:
In developing the different versions of Claude, the Anthropic team extensively tests and measures the performance of their advancing models. Below we can see some recent highlights in Claude AI performance:
Claude scored 88.0% on GSM8k grade-school math problems, showcasing its computational ability (source)
Aside from coding performance, Anthropic sees truthfulness, harmlessness, and helpfulness as pillars to Claude’s success. The following benchmarks were recently gathered by the Anthropic team in the wake of Claude 2.1’s release:
Source: www.anthropic.com
In more traditional benchmarks, the performance of Claude has been monitored while completing arduous standardized exams historically taken by humans. The following statistics measure the progress and improvements made by the different versions of Claude.
Here’s a comparative overview of how Claude 1.3, Claude 2, Claude 3 Opus, Claude 3 Sonnet, and Claude 3 Haiku perform on standard exams (MBE - Law, GRE - Writing, HumanEval - Python, and GSM3K - Math):
Note: The GRE writing test is scored from 0 to 6.0, the above graphic represents the available data on GRE writing scores as a percentage out of a total of 6.0.
Overview highlights:
Currently, the Claude AI models are available in about 159 countries worldwide (https://www.anthropic.com/claude-ai-locations). If unfortunately, you happen to reside outside those countries, it is still possible to use Claude through one of the methods below:
Through the span of 2023, Anthropic has released its various models of Claude to the public. The following below are some quick notes on the current state of the accessibility of the Claude LLM AI models:
New testing grounds have emerged with the recent developments of Anthropic’s Claude AI bot and the release of the Claude 3.5 Sonnet version.
In these tests, we’ll observe how effective the Claude model is at concealing AI content by scanning the AI-generated articles with Originality.ai’s professional AI detection tool. The tests will include an analysis of how Originality.ai performs at detecting content when prompts include requests to “humanize” content.
While Claude can be exceptionally useful at providing ideas and generating valuable suggestions, creating entire articles with AI should be avoided, as Google can penalize AI content that doesn’t comply with spam policies.
For testing purposes, we will use the most recent version of Claude - Claude 3.5 Sonnet and the Originality.ai AI Checker. Now, let’s proceed with the first test and prompt Claude!
First, we’ll prompt Claude to generate a typical article without extra instructions (to create a baseline for comparison during future tests). Claude’s generative technology is similar to other chatbots, however, Anthropic has aimed to humanize Claude’s responses as much as possible.
Let’s begin with the first tests:
[Prompt #1] - Write a short article (500–1000 words) on the integration of artificial intelligence in 2024.
We’ve received a total of 693 words from Claude, covering the essentials of recent AI integration trends in 2024. Let’s check Originality.ai’s detection result:
Originality.ai detects the output from Claude as Likely AI with 100% Confidence.
Now, let’s attempt to humanize Claude 3.5 Sonnet’s output:
[Prompt #2] - Write a short article (500–1000 words) on the integration of artificial intelligence in 2024. Use a human tone and stick to the fluidity of a human conversation. Break up the text, include unique bullets, and implement numbered lists. Provide suggestions in first-person and try to use popular phrasings.
As a result of the second prompt, we’ve managed to extract an 863-word example from Claude. Let’s check Originality.ai’s detection result:
Even when prompted to ‘stick to the fluidity of a human conversation,’ Originality.ai continues to identify the content as AI-generated with 99% Confidence that the output is likely AI.
The verdict from this round of testing? Providing Claude with extra instructions to create a more human-like tone in the prompt does not have a significant impact on the detection outcome.
Let’s proceed with the more complex tests, where we provide Claude with a human-written example of an article to use for comparison when generating text.
The unique capabilities of AI chatbots allow them to learn on the go via unique suggestions and user prompts. Let’s see what impact providing Claude with a unique article example has on AI detection.
We have provided Claude with a technical-themed example. Let’s have a look at the first prompt:
[Prompt #1] - Write a short article (500–1000 words) on the integration of artificial intelligence in 2024. Use this *article* as an example. Stick to the tone and structure of the provided article.
Similar to the first test, we won’t mention specific instructions that prompt it to humanize the content. The first prompt has generated a 622-word piece. Here are the detection results:
From this prompt, Originality.ai continues to identify the content as Likely AI. It detects the content as Likely AI with 75% Confidence (learn more about AI detection scores). The sections, which it detects as most likely generated by AI are highlighted in the deeper shades of red and orange.
Let’s move on with the second prompt and provide Claude with both an article example and instructions for content humanization:
[Prompt #2] - Write a short article (500–1000 words) on the integration of artificial intelligence in 2024. Use a human tone and stick to the fluidity of a human conversation. Break up the text, include unique bullets, and implement numbered lists. Provide suggestions in first-person and try to use popular phrasings. Use this *article* as an example. Stick to the tone and structure of the provided article.
Let’s compare the 692 words we’ve received with Originality.ai’s detection technology:
From this prompt, the AI Checker determined that the prompt was Likely AI with 100% Confidence, continuing to demonstrate that the detector identifies Claude’s content as AI-generated.
Overall Claude’s generated text was continuously identified as Likely AI by the Originality.ai AI detector. As new models are released, we’ll continue to evaluate the detectability of their text.
Below is a pricing table comparing the costs of different Claude AI models as of May 2024 (source):
As of September 2024, (latest available data), the Claude AI website has garnered widespread attention, reaching (source):
Claude AI shows great marketing potential as currently, the site reaches roughly 75.93% of its traffic through direct searches, the chart below shows how many users Claude AI reaches through other web traffic sources:
Similarly, this next graph illustrates the traffic driven to Claude AI by different social media channels (source):
As of May 2024 (latest available data), the most common Claude AI can be described by the stats below (source):
(Source)
Geography (source):
Time will tell whether Anthropic’s strategic decision to unveil Claude 2.1 during Sam Altman’s skirmish against OpenAI’s board of directors. Resounding market praise and support have made it clear that Anthropic is positioning itself as a frontrunner and key player in the AI field. By focusing on the HHH (honest, harmless, helpful) application of AI, Claude has found a niche in the market which is highlighted by the strength of the statistics listed above. With the continued improvements and advancements showcased by Anthropic and Claude AI, it is evident that AI as a field is at the onset of rapid transformation.
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!
