"It was one of the few plagiarism…"

It was one of the few plagiarism checkers that actually showed the sources which the students used/ copied and whether AI technology was utilized or not. Many similar checkers were unable to effectively provide such a detailed report.

"Classroom savior"

Using Copyleaks has helped virtually eliminate plagiarism and A.I. use in my classroom.

"Unreliable"

Unreliable, flagging everything as AI generated. I tested a document I wrote in 2015 and still detected AI garbage.

"Copyleak unreliable ai dectection"

I've used ai to paraphrase sentence in my work, usually being careful as the content have not been generated by ai but instead paraphrased and further paraphrased using quillbot and hand written changes which is have been considered 100% human in all other available ai checker, but only copy leaks dispays it as 97% so i thought that maybe i lacked content which was not enough to be correctly detect and as such scanned the whole paragraph that i've written myself along with that 1 sentence and suprise even my whole personally written paragraph is considered as ai generated.. guess i'm an ai seeing that even what i write on my own instead of paraphrasing research is considered to be 80%+ ai generate.

ps: i checked what i've written here on copy leaks again and even this is considered as 21% ai generated

also copyleaks if you see this, stop advertising yourself as the most accurate when you aren't even close to being the supposedly 98%+ accurate

"I love Copyleaks"

I love Copyleaks! I like to get fresh ideas from ChatGPT and then an outline for my articles. After writing I use Copyleaks to check for Plagiarism just to be sure. I would recommend Copyleaks to anyone looking for a Plagiarism Checker.
Carol Barnes

"Mala herramienta"

Detección de IA muy ineficiente. Contenidos 100% humanos los detecta como IA, no recomiendo su uso

"My experience with the CopyLeaks AI…"

My experience with the CopyLeaks AI Checker left me utterly bewildered and frustrated. This so-called plagiarism detection tool not only failed to deliver on its promises but also displayed a shocking lack of understanding, mislabeling original content as AI-generated. It is safe to say that this platform is nothing short of a foolish endeavor.

One of the fundamental issues with CopyLeaks AI Checker is its propensity to incorrectly identify original content as AI-generated or plagiarized. Despite submitting entirely authentic and unique documents, the tool repeatedly flagged sections as potential instances of plagiarism. This glaring error undermines any trust one might have had in the system's capability to differentiate between genuine content and plagiarized material. How can we rely on a tool that cannot distinguish between original work and AI-generated text?

Furthermore, the platform's inability to comprehend the context and nuances of the submitted documents is utterly baffling. The algorithmic approach employed by CopyLeaks AI Checker seems incapable of recognizing the distinct voice, style, and intent behind different pieces of writing. Consequently, it haphazardly marks portions of original content as potentially plagiarized, leading to a lack of confidence in the system's accuracy and intelligence.

Not only does this mislabeling of original content reflect poorly on the tool's functionality, but it also hampers the overall user experience. Spending valuable time submitting authentic work only to have it flagged as AI-generated or plagiarized is frustrating and counterproductive. It exposes the superficiality and lack of sophistication of the CopyLeaks AI Checker's algorithms, making it an impractical and ineffective platform.

Given these significant shortcomings, it is evident that the CopyLeaks AI Checker is a monumentally flawed platform. Its inability to accurately identify original content, coupled with its failure to comprehend contextual nuances, renders it a foolish and unreliable tool. If you value the integrity of your work and seek a genuine plagiarism detection solution, I strongly recommend exploring alternative platforms that demonstrate a better understanding of originality and context.

"Unreliable Claims: A Critical Assessment of Copyleaks as an 'AI' Detector"

Copyleaks, as an integrity-checking tool, lacks reliability and should not be marketed as an "AI" detector. When a story summary exhibits close similarities, Copyleaks erroneously labels it as "AI," whereas it more accurately falls within the realm of unintentional plagiarism. Claiming to be "reliable" and "trustworthy" is deceptive advertising, misrepresenting the tool's true capabilities and accuracy.

"Be AWARE"

I wanted to try the free trial and provided all my data, but it was not possible. I have been forced to pay. So I cancelled my account.

"Unreliability and bogus AI detection for copyleaks"

This review concerns the AI detection. The AI detection for copyleaks is inaccurate. I will demonstrate to you why you should avoid it. I scan a 7 page paper in copyleaks at 7.40 AM later in the day and it does not flag any content as AI content. i recheck the paper once more AT 6.30PM and this thing flags almost half of the content as AI written. I go a step further to scan the same content using turnitin which shows that the the content is entirely human written. To build confident in this result, i go a step further to confirm this using other softwares like GPTKIT [which uses 6 probabilistic models], GPTZERO, and ZEROGPT which confirms the content is NOT! AI WRITTEN as copyleaks alludes. Your AI detection capability is very unreliable!!!!