Tech
How do ‘AI detection’ tools actually work? And are they effective?
As nearly half of all Australians say they have recently used artificial intelligence (AI) tools, knowing when and how they’re being used is becoming more important.
Consultancy firm Deloitte recently partially refunded the Australian government after a report they published had AI-generated errors in it.
A lawyer also recently faced disciplinary action after false AI-generated citations were discovered in a formal court document. And many universities are concerned about how their students use AI.
Amid these examples, a range of “AI detection” tools have emerged to try to address people’s need for identifying accurate, trustworthy and verified content.
But how do these tools actually work? And are they effective at spotting AI-generated material?
How do AI detectors work?
Several approaches exist, and their effectiveness can depend on which types of content are involved.
Detectors for text often try to infer AI involvement by looking for “signature” patterns in sentence structure, writing style, and the predictability of certain words or phrases being used. For example, the use of “delves” and “showcasing” has skyrocketed since AI writing tools became more available.
However the difference between AI and human patterns is getting smaller and smaller. This means signature-based tools can be highly unreliable.
Detectors for images sometimes work by analyzing embedded metadata which some AI tools add to the image file.
For example, the Content Credentials inspect tool allows people to view how a user has edited a piece of content, provided it was created and edited with compatible software. Like text, images can also be compared against verified datasets of AI-generated content (such as deepfakes).
Finally, some AI developers have started adding watermarks to the outputs of their AI systems. These are hidden patterns in any kind of content which are imperceptible to humans but can be detected by the AI developer. None of the large developers have shared their detection tools with the public yet, though.
Each of these methods has its drawbacks and limitations.
How effective are AI detectors?
The effectiveness of AI detectors can depend on several factors. These include which tools were used to make the content and whether the content was edited or modified after generation.
The tools’ training data can also affect results.
For example, key datasets used to detect AI-generated pictures do not have enough full-body pictures of people or images from people of certain cultures. This means successful detection is already limited in many ways.
Watermark-based detection can be quite good at detecting content made by AI tools from the same company. For example, if you use one of Google’s AI models such as Imagen, Google’s SynthID watermark tool claims to be able to spot the resulting outputs.
But SynthID is not publicly available yet. It also doesn’t work if, for example, you generate content using ChatGPT, which isn’t made by Google. Interoperability across AI developers is a major issue.
AI detectors can also be fooled when the output is edited. For example, if you use a voice cloning app and then add noise or reduce the quality (by making it smaller), this can trip up voice AI detectors. The same is true with AI image detectors.
Explainability is another major issue. Many AI detectors will give the user a “confidence estimate” of how certain it is that something is AI-generated. But they usually don’t explain their reasoning or why they think something is AI-generated.
It is important to realize that it is still early days for AI detection, especially when it comes to automatic detection.
A good example of this can be seen in recent attempts to detect deepfakes. The winner of Meta’s Deepfake Detection Challenge identified four out of five deepfakes. However, the model was trained on the same data it was tested on—a bit like having seen the answers before it took the quiz.
When tested against new content, the model’s success rate dropped. It only correctly identified three out of five deepfakes in the new dataset.
All this means AI detectors can and do get things wrong. They can result in false positives (claiming something is AI generated when it’s not) and false negatives (claiming something is human-generated when it’s not).
For the users involved, these mistakes can be devastating—such as a student whose essay is dismissed as AI-generated when they wrote it themselves, or someone who mistakenly believes an AI-written email came from a real human.
It’s an arms race as new technologies are developed or refined, and detectors are struggling to keep up.
Where to from here?
Relying on a single tool is problematic and risky. It’s generally safer and better to use a variety of methods to assess the authenticity of a piece of content.
You can do so by cross-referencing sources and double-checking facts in written content. Or for visual content, you might compare suspect images to other images purported to be taken during the same time or place. You might also ask for additional evidence or explanation if something looks or sounds dodgy.
But ultimately, trusted relationships with individuals and institutions will remain one of the most important factors when detection tools fall short or other options aren’t available.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Citation:
How do ‘AI detection’ tools actually work? And are they effective? (2025, November 16)
retrieved 16 November 2025
from https://techxplore.com/news/2025-11-ai-tools-effective.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no
part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
Tech
Looking for the Best Smart Scale? Step on Up
Other Smart Scales
Renpho MorphoScan for $150: The Renpho MorphoScan full-body scanner looks surprisingly similar to the Runstar FG2015, including a near-identical display attached to the handlebars. Well, spoiler alert, they are basically the same scale. They even use the same app to collect data (and you can even use both scales simultaneously with it). The only reason this scale isn’t our top pick for the category is that it’s $15 more expensive. You can rest assured that a price war is looming.
Arboleaf Body Fat Scale CS20W for $40: This affordable Bluetooth scale isn’t the most eye-catching I’ve tested, owing to its big, silver electrodes and an oversized display that comes across as a bit garish. While weight is easy to make out, the six additional statistics showcased are difficult to read, all displayed simultaneously. I like the Arboleaf app better than the scale, where five more metrics can be found in addition to the seven above, each featuring a helpful explanation when tapping on it. It’s a solid deal at this price, but the upsell to get an “intelligent interpretation report” for an extra $40 per year is probably safe to skip.
Hume Health Body Pod for $183: Hume Health’s Body Pod, another full-body scanner with handles, is heavily advertised—at least to the apps on my phone—and touted (by Hume) as the Next Big Thing in the world of body management. While the app is indeed glossy and inviting, I was shocked to discover how flimsy the hardware felt, that it lacked Wi-Fi, and that some features are locked behind a $100-a-year Hume Plus subscription plan. It works fine enough, but you can get results that are just as good with a cheaper device.
Garmin Index S2 for $191: Five years after its release, the Index S2 is still Garmin’s current model, a surprise for a company otherwise obsessed with fitness. It’s still noteworthy for its lovely color display, which walks you through its six body metrics (for up to 16 users) with each weigh-in. The display also provides your weight trend over time in graphical form and can even display the weather. The scale connects directly to Wi-Fi and Garmin’s cloud-based storage system, so you don’t need a phone nearby to track your progress, as with Bluetooth-only scales. A phone running the Garmin Connect app (Android, iOS) is handy, so you can keep track of everything over time. Unfortunately, as health apps go, Connect is a bit of a bear, so expect a learning curve—especially if you want to make changes to the way the scale works. You can turn its various LCD-screen widgets on or off in the app, but finding everything can be difficult due to the daunting scope of the Garmin ecosystem. The color screen is nice at first, but ultimately adds little to the package.
Omron BCM-500 for $92: With its large LCD panel, quartet of onboard buttons, and oversize silver electrodes, the Omron BCM-500 is an eye-catching masterwork of brutalist design. If your bathroom is decked out in concrete and wrought iron, this scale will fit right in. The Bluetooth unit syncs with Omron’s HeartAdvisor app (Android, iOS), but it provides all six of its body metrics directly on the scale, cycling through them with each weigh-in (for up to four users). It can be difficult to read the label for each of the data points, in part because the LCD isn’t backlit, but the app is somewhat easier to follow, offering front-page graphs of weight, skeletal muscle, and body fat. On the other hand, the presentation is rather clinical, and the app is surprisingly slow to sync. For a scale without a Wi-Fi connection, it’s rather expensive too.
Power up with unlimited access to WIRED. Get best-in-class reporting and exclusive subscriber content that’s too important to ignore. Subscribe Today.
Tech
To Start Doing What You Want to Do, First Do Less
This applies not just to things you have to do, but also things you think you want to do. Maybe you think you should learn Spanish, but you haven’t done anything to actually learn Spanish. Admitting that you aren’t actually committed to the idea enough to do the work of learning Spanish can help close that loop. Letting go of that feeling that you should learn Spanish just might be the thing that frees up your mind enough that you decide to take up paddleboarding on a whim. The point is that the new year isn’t just a time for starting something new. It’s a time to let go of the things from that past that are no longer serving you.
In many ways this is the antidote to that ever-so-popular slogan “Just do it.” Just do it implies that you shouldn’t think about it, instead of deciding what you really want to do or should do. Maybe spend some time remembering why you wanted to do it in the first place, and if those reasons no longer resonate with you, just don’t do it.
If you like this idea, I highly recommend getting Allen’s book. It goes into much more detail on this idea and has some practical advice on letting go. You can still keep track of those things, in case you do decide, years from now, when you’re paddleboarding through the Sea of Cortez, that now you really do want to learn Spanish and are willing to do the work.
Remember to Live
I will confess, my enthusiasm for Getting Things Done has waned over the years. Not because the system doesn’t work, but because I have found my life more dramatically improved by doing less, not more. It’s not that I’ve stopped getting things done. It’s that I’ve found many of the things I felt like I should do were not really my idea; they were ideas I’d internalized from other places. I didn’t really want to do them, so I didn’t, then I felt guilty about it.
While everything I’ve written above remains good advice for starting a healthy habit and keeping it going, it’s worth spending some time and making sure you know why you want to do what you’re doing. I have been rereading Bertrand Russell’s In Praise of Idleness, and this line jumped out at me: “The modern man thinks that everything ought to be done for the sake of something else, and never for its own sake.”
Tech
Oh No! A Free Scale That Tells Me My Stress Levels and Body Fat
I will admit to being afraid of scales—the kind that weigh you, not the ones on a snake. And so my first reaction to the idea I’d be getting a free body-scanning scale with a Factor prepared meal kit subscription was something akin to “Oh no!”
It’s always bad or shameful news, I figured, and maybe nothing I don’t already know. Though, as it turned out, I was wrong on both points.
Factor is, of course, the prepared meal brand from meal kit giant HelloFresh, which I’ve tested while reviewing dozens of meal kits this past year. Think delivery TV dinners, but actually fresh and never frozen. Factor meals are meant to be microwaved, but I found when I reviewed Factor last year that the meals actually tasted much better if you air-fry them (ideally using a Ninja Crispi, the best reheating device I know).
Especially, Factor excels at the low-carb and protein-rich diet that has become equally fashionable among people who want to lose weight and people who like to lift it. Hence, this scale. Factor would like you to be able to track your progress in gaining muscle mass, losing fat, or both. And then presumably keep using Factor to make your fitness or wellness goals.
While your first week of Factor comes at a discount right now, regular-price meals will be $14 to $15 a serving, plus $11 shipping per box. That’s less than most restaurant delivery, but certainly more than if you were whipping up these meals yourself.
If you subscribe between now and the end of March, the third Factor meal box will come with a free Withings Body Comp scale, which generally retails north of $200. The Withings doesn’t just weigh you. It scans your proportions of fat and bone and muscle, and indirectly measures stress levels and the elasticity of your blood vessels. It is, in fact, WIRED’s favorite smart scale, something like a fitness watch for your feet.
Anyway, to get the deal, use the code CONWITHINGS on Factor’s website, or follow the promo code link below.
Is It My Body
The scale that comes with the Factor subscription is about as fancy as it gets: a $200 Body Comp scale from high-tech fitness monitoring company Withings. The scale uses bioelectrical impedance analysis and some other proprietary methods in order to measure not just your weight but your body fat percentage, your lean muscle mass, your visceral fat, and your bone and water mass, your pulse rate, and even the stiffness of your arteries.
To get all this information, all you really need to do is stand on the scale for a few minutes. The scale will recognize you based on your weight (you’ll need to be accurate in describing yourself when you set up your profile for this to work), and then cycle through a series of measurements before giving you a cheery weather report for the day.
Your electrodermal activity—the “skin response via sweat gland stimulation in your feet”—provides a gauge of stress, or at least excitation. The Withings also purports to measure your arterial age, or stiffness, via the velocity of your blood with each heartbeat. This sounds esoteric, but it has some scientific backing.
Note that many physicians caution against taking indirect measurements of body composition as gospel. Other physicians counter that previous “gold standard” measurements aren’t perfectly accurate, either. It’s a big ol’ debate. For myself, I tend to take smart-scale measurements as a convenient way to track progress, and also a good home indicator for when there’s a problem that may require attention from a physician.
And so of course, I was petrified. So much bad news to get all at once! I figured.
-
Sports6 days agoBrooks Koepka should face penalty if he rejoins PGA Tour, golf pundit says
-
Business6 days agoGovt registers 144olive startups | The Express Tribune
-
Politics5 days agoThailand, Cambodia agree to ‘immediate’ ceasefire: joint statement
-
Entertainment6 days agoSecond actor accuses Tyler Perry of sexual assault in new lawsuit
-
Politics6 days agoHeavy rains, flash floods leave Southern California homes caked in mud
-
Fashion5 days agoClimate change may hit RMG export earnings of 4 nations by 2030: Study
-
Entertainment6 days agoInside royal families most private Christmas moments
-
Fashion6 days agoArea CG’s Fernando Rius says luxury is not about buying something expensive, it is about understanding the culture, history, and time invested


