DetekceGPT reviews
What teachers, editors, copywriters and students who use DetekceGPT for AI text detection and humanisation say about it.
I don't want to accuse anyone on a hunch. When something feels off, at least I have something to bring to the student — and a few times it has proved the hunch wrong.
Freelancers send texts at the last minute. Before it goes to layout I run it through and I know what I am dealing with.
A client wrote to me that it came out as AI somewhere. I wrote it myself. Since then I would rather run it through before sending.
We have a rule agreed on in the team. Six months on, the arguments about who really wrote what have stopped entirely.
I spent three months on my bachelor's thesis and the day before the deadline I wanted to go through it once more. Within seconds I knew everything was fine.
I used to read term papers twice and still wasn't sure. Now I run them through and have time for what the students actually wrote.
It saves me a whole afternoon on every batch of papers. That is time I can put into feedback.
We have six freelance writers and each of them writes differently. Before a text goes further I run it through and know whether anything still needs sorting out.
What helped most was the calm. I don't have to suspect anyone, I just check and move on.
I use it on my own texts. I draft with AI, rewrite it my way and then check that it sounds like me again.
For the client it is an argument. I attach the result and there is nothing to discuss.
What I value most is the speed. I paste a text, get an answer and carry on working.
I ran my master's thesis through after every chapter. It felt better to hand it in knowing it had been checked.
I showed it to colleagues at a meeting and within a week the whole department was using it.
I used to check application cover letters by hand and it took hours. Now I am done by lunchtime.
Everything here goes through proofreading. This saves me that first, worst pass where I am only working out what I am dealing with.
Humanisation helped me with texts that sounded clunky. I rewrote them and they finally read like something written for people.
I write a blog about finance and want to be sure it doesn't sound machine-made. I run every article through before publishing.
I showed it to the students right there in class. Since then they know where they stand and hand in more honest work.
It has made working with content suppliers much simpler. I don't have to ask whether a human wrote the text.
I can get through thirty papers in a morning. It used to take me two days.
I appreciate that it doesn't draw conclusions for me. It gives me evidence and leaves the decision to me.
At the agency we hand clients dozens of texts a month. Checking is now part of the process and holds nobody up.
It is not about catching anyone out. It is about being sure of what I am sending on.
I write specialist articles and the newsroom wanted proof the text wasn't generated. Sorted in a minute.
I use it to check translations. When a text reads suspiciously smoothly, I notice before the client does.
Doctoral theses are long and reading them carefully takes time. This tells me where to look properly.
I tried several tools and stayed with this one. It is simple and doesn't make a fuss.
When an application comes in, I run the cover letter through. It saves me interviews that would lead nowhere.
We have it in the editorial workflow as a required step. Nothing has slipped past us since.
The history helps a lot. I can see what I checked last week and don't have to deal with it again.
I upload a file and don't have to copy anything. It sounds like a small thing, but across forty papers it is half an hour saved.
The students insisted they had written it themselves. I showed them the result, we talked it over and they rewrote it. No arguments.
I write product descriptions for an online shop. Humanisation stripped out that typical AI rhythm and the pages finally read well.
Speed is the main thing. No waiting, no signing in a second time, it just works.
It saves me nerves more than time. I don't have to guess whether someone is sending me their own work.
We are a small newsroom and we don't have the people for long checks. This handles it for us.
I drafted the first version with AI and then rewrote it. The check confirmed it is mine now.
I use it on the theses I supervise. It saves me two consultations that would be nothing but arguing.
I paste a text, click and that's it. Nothing to configure and no interface to learn.
We check content for clients and have to stand behind it. This gives us something to lean on.
As a student I use it the other way round — I check my own texts so the university doesn't accuse me for nothing.
It helped most with assignments where the same topic keeps coming back. The differences between papers show up immediately.
We tried rolling it out for a month as an experiment and never switched it off.
I write press releases and clients notice when a text sounds impersonal. I check it every time.
We keep it open all day next to the mail. A text comes in, I run it through, I move on.
The difference is mainly that I no longer spend evenings on it. Checking fits into working hours.
I use it on candidates' test assignments. It saves me two rounds of interviews a year.
The questions generated from a check gave me direction on what to ask the student. I haven't seen that anywhere else.
I rewrite other people's material into our tone. Humanisation saves me the first half of that work.
We use it to check newsletters. Readers respond better when a text doesn't sound like a template.
Before I hand a report to management I run it through. It is the last check I used to do on gut feeling alone.
It helps me teach. I show students what reads as machine-made in their text and they learn to rewrite it.
Within three months we stopped dealing with content complaints. That is the biggest saving for us.
I use it on older texts I took over from a colleague. At least I know what I am working with.