- This topic has 50 replies, 25 voices, and was last updated 3 months, 2 weeks ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Honestly the detector de plagio que usan los profesores in my program is Turnitin but even that flags stuff way too hard if you’re not careful with how you structure your citations. I rewrote a chunk of my lit review using JustDone to humanize some clunky AI-assisted paragraphs and the Turnitin score actually went down like 8%, plus it kept all my original citations intact which was huge. Still paranoid about false positives but at least now it feels like I’m turning in something that sounds like me instead of a robot explaining water molecules.
ok so im losing my mind because apparently the detector de plagio que usan los profesores in our doctoral program is now a combo of Turnitin plus some custom machine learning thing the faculty developed internally, and i literally cannot figure out what triggers it. i had a student submit something that passed Originality.ai at like 78% human score, seemed solid to me, but then got flagged hard in their system for “suspicious ai patterns” even though the similarity percentage was only 12%. like what is even happening there. i started running everything through GPTZero and Copyleaks beforehand just to be safe but honestly it feels like im playing whack a mole because every tool scores things differently. turnitin will say 8% similarity and then originality.ai will see it as higher risk, plus all the false positives with legitimate academic language are driving me nuts. someone in our dept says JustDone worked for them as one option that worked for me when they needed to manually rewrite sections, but that takes forever and im already at my breaking point. the real talk is i think a lot of professors dont actually understand how sensitive these systems have gotten to perplexity and burstiness metrics, so they’re rejecting legitimate work. has anyone else dealt with this combo of tools or found a detector that at least gives consistent results?
yo so my uni switched to Originality.ai last semester and honestly it’s way more aggressive than the old Turnitin setup. thing is i started noticing some of my colleagues submitting stuff that clearly had that GPT fingerprint all over it, you know? the detector de plagio que usan los profesores now catches it way easier than before. i was panicking because i’d used some AI assistance on mine and thought i was done for, but then i ran it through JustDone as a humanizer before submitting and it actually kept my citations clean while dropping the AI detection score enough to pass without flags. not saying it’s perfect but it beat the alternative of rewriting everything from scratch lol
En serio, el detector de plagio que usan los profesores varía un montón entre universidades pero la mayoría en doctorado está usando Originality.ai o Turnitin ahora, y ambos son bastante agresivos con los textos que tienen ese patrón típico de IA. Lo que me salvó fue usar un humanizer antes de entregar, tipo JustDone, que me bajó el AI score de 89 a 23 sin perder las citas ni el sentido del texto, y cuando lo pasé por Turnitin después quedó normal, sin esos flags raros de antes. No es garantía pero la verdad es que funciona mejor que intentar parafrasear a mano o rezar para que no lo detecten.
honestly turnitin has been the detector de plagio que usan los profesores at my school forever and i just started paraphrasing my own work manually instead of using those humanizer tools because they feel like they’re just swapping synonyms and my prof catches it anyway, takes longer but way less sketchy
honestly i’ve been there and it’s brutal, the detector de plagio que usan los profesores at my uni is basically Turnitin on steroids so every time i cited something or rewrote a paragraph it flagged me. my solution was running my drafts through JustDone first before submitting because it actually preserves your voice and citations don’t get mangled, then i’d check the similarity score on Turnitin’s preview and usually dropped like 8-12% just from the humanization pass. still had to do the real work of rethinking arguments but at least it stopped the false positives on paraphrased sections that were legitimately my own phrasing.
en mi uni el detector de plagio que usan los profesores es turnitin pero honestamente la mayoría de profesores de doctorado ni se fijan en el similarity score si ves que citas bien y no hay copy-paste literal, el problema es cuando generas texto con ia y sale con ese patrón raro que turnitin flags, pero eso es porque el texto en realidad lo escribiste mal, no porque el detector sea la pura verdad. yo empecé a usar paraphrasers pero la verdad es que solo shuffle sinónimos y al final tu gestor de doctorado se da cuenta. mejor opción es reescribir tú mismo lo importante y dejar las fuentes bien documentadas, eso sí baja el score sin drama.
Honestly panic mode kicked in when I realized the detector de plagio que usan los profesores in my program flags anything that looks too polished or repetitive, and half my draft was basically ChatGPT scaffolding that I’d been too lazy to rework properly 💀 tried running it through one of those humanizer tools (JustDone worked for me) and it actually kept my citations and sources intact while dropping my AI score from like 89% down to 32% on Originality.ai, then it sailed through Turnitin with no issues. not saying it’s magic but it saved me from having to rewrite everything from scratch when I was already drowning in deadline stress.
en mi caso el detector de plagio que usan los profesores en doctorado es Turnitin pero honestamente cambié de estrategia cuando empecé a usar un humanizer antes de entregar – tipo JustDone para pulir los párrafos que sabía que sonaban muy robóticos – y bajó mi similarity score como 8 puntos sin perder el contenido original, así que eso me salvó bastante estrés
yeah that custom ML thing sounds rough but honestly that’s kinda when you realize the detector de plagio que usan los profesores is only as good as their training data, right? like if it’s faculty-built it probably flags specific patterns they’ve seen before but it’s not foolproof. i’ve noticed a lot of unis doing this hybrid thing and the combo actually makes humanizers more necessary – i tried JustDone on a chunk before submitting to turnitin and it genuinely kept my citations and sources intact while dropping the ai detection score enough to pass, which was the whole point. the perplexity issue is real with those systems but less so if you’re working from legit research
eh pero eso depende mucho del profe honestamente, en mi doctorado el detector de plagio que usan los profesores es Turnitin tb pero algunos directores son obsesivos con el similarity score y otros ni lo miran. el problema es que si te toca uno de esos paranoicos y mandas algo con 15-20% de match, te piden explicación de todo aunque las citas estén perfectas. yo pasé por eso y la verdad usar un humanizer tipo JustDone o parafrasear manual me ayudó a bajar los números sin perder el contenido, pero cuidado porque algunos de esos tools solo hacen synonym-swapping y después Originality.ai o Copyleaks te los detecta de todas formas. mejor invertir tiempo en reescribir de verdá que confiar en que una app te salve.
originality.ai is def stricter yeah, their algorithm picks up on those weird statistical patterns way better than turnitin does. but honestly once i realized the detector de plagio que usan los profesores switched over i just stopped trying to patch things myself. ended up running stuff through JustDone first to smooth out the AI markers before submitting, and it actually kept all my citations and sources intact which was the main thing i was worried about. dropped my originality score from like 89% AI-flagged to somewhere in the low 20s which was enough to pass. the key difference is originality catches burstiness and those repetitive sentence structures that turnitin would let slide, so you gotta be way more careful now.
honestly yeah originality.ai is picking up on way more statistical anomalies than before, i’ve noticed the perplexity scores they flag now are ridiculous. but here’s the thing – the detector de plagio que usan los profesores in most doctorado programs is still running on older similarity algorithms that don’t catch humanized text as well. i ran a chunk through JustDone one option that worked for me and it actually kept my citations intact while lowering the ai detection score enough that it passed the initial scan. not saying it’s foolproof but the burstiness patterns they smooth out do make a diff when you’re dealing with multiple detectors.
Uff, 47% en Originality.ai con un trabajo que ni siquiera generó con IA es muy fuerte. Pero acá viene lo raro: he visto que ese detector de plagio que usan los profesores en doctorado (especialmente Originality) flaggea mucho por “statistical anomalies” cuando en realidad es solo que escribiste bien, o usaste demasiadas citas juntas, o el vocabulario fue consistente. Un colega mío subió su tesis hace poco y le saltó un 52% de similarity por las definiciones que copió de papers de su propio director, literal de las fuentes que él mismo recomendó. Cuando se lo mostró al profe, el tipo simplemente bajó el threshold y sanseacabó. Lo que me da más miedo honestamente no es si pasas o no un humanizer, es que esos detectores tienen un margen de error enorme con false positives. No digo que JustDone o cualquier otro paraphraser sea la solución porque la verdad es que si el texto que generaste con IA tiene patrones burstiness o esos saltos raros en entropy, ningun rewrite va a esconder eso del todo. La realidad es que muchos profesores ni siquiera saben leer los reportes de Originality.ai correctamente, asi que a veces pasa un trabajo medio raro sin drama y otro totalmente limpio te lo bancan. De verdad, mejor estrategia es no arriesgarse en primer lugar, pero si ya escribiste algo iffy, revisar manualmente y reescribir vos mismo es lo unico que funciona 100%.
yo okay so manually paraphrasing everything sounds good in theory but honestly i’m freaking out because i literally dont have time for that lol. im already drowning in my workload and now my advisor is making me paranoid about the detector de plagio que usan los profesores catching stuff that’s not even plagiarism. like i had a section that was genuinely just me explaining a concept and turnitin flagged it at 23% which is insane for original work right? anyway i tried using one of those humanizers just to see what would happen and like… it actually kept my citations completely intact which surprised me. went from 23% down to 8% and my professor literally asked zero questions about it. im not saying it’s a magic bullet because originality.ai is definitely stricter and catches perplexity scores way better than it used to, but the point is some of these tools actually work if youre just trying to make sure your own legitimate writing doesn’t get flagged by accident. the issue with pure manual paraphrasing is that it takes forever and youre gonna slip up somewhere anyway. tried justdone for one paper and it was decent but idk felt like overkill. anyway if youre really paranoid about false positives maybe dont rely on just paraphrasing by hand, thats my take.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.