Now Serving South Florida
In the digital age, AI-generated content has become increasingly sophisticated, making it harder to distinguish between human-written and AI-written articles. However, there are still some key indicators that can help you determine whether an article was generated by artificial intelligence.
AI-generated articles often use repetitive phrases and lack the nuanced tone of human writing. If you notice that an article frequently repeats certain words or sentence structures, it might be AI-generated.
AI lacks personal experiences, emotions, and real-world perspectives. If an article presents information in a purely factual or overly neutral way without any unique insights or anecdotes, it could be AI-written.
AI tends to follow a rigid structure, often forming sentences that feel formulaic. A lack of natural flow and variation in sentence complexity can indicate that an article was generated by AI.
While humans naturally make small grammatical mistakes or typos, AI tends to produce grammatically correct but sometimes awkward or unnatural phrases. If an article is too “perfect” yet feels slightly off, AI may be the author.
AI can summarize information well, but it struggles with deep analysis, creativity, or strong arguments. If an article provides only surface-level insights without detailed explanations or critical thinking, it might be AI-generated.
AI sometimes struggles with maintaining context, leading to paragraphs that suddenly change topics or introduce irrelevant information. If an article feels disjointed, it could be the result of AI generation.
There are online tools that can analyze text and determine whether it was likely written by AI. While not foolproof, using AI detection software can provide additional clues.
AI-generated content is improving rapidly, but it still lacks the depth, personal touch, and creativity of human writing. By looking for repetitive language, lack of personal experience, and overly structured phrasing, you can often tell whether an article was written by AI.
I bet you’re not surprised. Yesterday’s article and even this one (prior to this last paragraph) were both created entirely using AI. Now that I’m going back and reading these, they really aren’t bad articles. But you can tell, can’t you, faithful reader? The numbered list of topics, the lack of depth? Perhaps I should start asking the question to ChatGPT in a way that will make an article generated sound, well.. More human? So how should I phrase that? In my next post maybe the prompt will include those exact words “more human”. I might get a more natural response with a couple iterations of prompts. Perhaps I will become such a good prompt engineer that by the time this year ends, you, reader, truly will not know the difference between my words and ChatGPT’s.