芝加哥大学研究发现，AI文本检测器性能差异显著，部分工具准确率高，但有的频繁误判，尤其在短文本中失灵。Pangram检测器以高精度和成本效益表现最佳。研究基于1992篇人类文本和四款主流大模型，覆盖六类文本类型，揭示检测器在可靠性和鲁棒性方面的不足。
芝加哥大学研究发现，市面AI文本检测工具性能差异显著。研究基于1992篇人类文本（含评论、新闻、小说等六类）及GPT-4等主流模型生成的AI文本进行测试，结果显示不同检测工具准确率存在明显差距，呼吁提升检测技术可靠性。
精准检测ChatGPT等多模型AI生成内容，支持20+语言，准确率超99.98%
%20--%3e%3cdefs%3e%3cstyle%3e%20.st0%20{%20fill:%20%23061b40;%20}%20.st1%20{%20fill:%20%23306af1;%20}%20.st2%20{%20fill:%20%235ce5cf;%20}%20%3c/style%3e%3c/defs%3e%3cg%3e%3cpath%20class='st0'%20d='M55,10.5h9v3h-9v9h12V7.5h-12v3ZM64,19.5h-6v-3h6v3Z'/%3e%3cpolygon%20class='st0'%20points='69%2016.5%2078%2016.5%2078%2019.5%2069%2019.5%2069%2022.5%2081%2022.5%2081%2013.5%2072%2013.5%2072%2010.5%2081%2010.5%2081%207.5%2069%207.5%2069%2016.5'/%3e%3cpolygon%20class='st0'%20points='95%2010.5%2095%207.5%2083%207.5%2083%2022.5%2095%2022.5%2095%2019.5%2086%2019.5%2086%2016.5%2095%2016.5%2095%2013.5%2086%2013.5%2086%2010.5%2095%2010.5'/%3e%3cpath%20class='st0'%20d='M40,1.5v21h11.6l1.4-1.4v-7.6h0c0,0-1.4-1.5-1.4-1.5l1.4-1.4V2.9l-1.4-1.4h-11.6ZM50,19.5h-7v-6h7v6ZM50,10.5h-7v-6h7v6Z'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3cpath%20class='st1'%20d='M23.1,24L14.7,4.8l-4.9,11.2h3.8l-1.8,4H3.3L12.1,0H2C.9,0,0,.9,0,2v20c0,1.1.9,2,2,2h21.1Z'/%3e%3cpath%20class='st2'%20d='M34,0h-16.8l10.6,24h6.2c1.1,0,2-.9,2-2V2C36,.9,35.1,0,34,0ZM32.5,20h-4V4h4v16Z'/%3e%3c/svg%3e)
