Unbelievable! The Easiest Way to Bypass AI Content Detection - How I Did It!

Andy Stapleton
10 Apr 202409:58

TLDRThe video discusses the effectiveness of five AI content detection bypass tools based on a test conducted using a PhD abstract written in 2011. The results show that while Turnitin was the least effective at detecting AI-generated content, Originality and Gp0 performed better. The tools tested were Fasley, Stealth Writer, Undetected, Bypass AI, and Hicks Bypass, with Undetected and Fasley being the most successful at evading detection. However, the video emphasizes that AI-generated content should not be directly submitted as one's own work, but rather used as a foundation to build upon with personal understanding and paraphrasing.

Takeaways

  • 🔍 The video discusses testing various AI content detection bypass services using a PhD abstract written in 2011, confirmed to be non-AI generated.
  • 📝 The abstract was initially checked in Turnitin, GPT, and GP0, showing no signs of AI content, setting a baseline for the experiment.
  • 🤖 The script details the process of using Chat GPT to rewrite the abstract and the resulting AI detection scores from different services.
  • 📉 Turnitin performed poorly in detecting AI content, even when the content was clearly AI-generated.
  • 🏆 Originality emerged as the best service at detecting AI content, consistently identifying AI-generated text even after bypass attempts.
  • 🚀 Fasley and Undetectable were the most successful in bypassing AI detection tools, with Undetectable having the highest success rate.
  • 📊 The results varied significantly among the services, with Turnitin and GP0 being less effective compared to Originality and others.
  • 🎯 The video emphasizes the importance of not directly submitting AI-generated content as one's own, but rather using it as a scaffold for personal understanding and work.
  • 🤔 The speaker advises against using the AI content directly for submissions due to unnatural phrasing and word choices.
  • 📚 The video concludes with a suggestion to use AI-generated content responsibly, as a tool for enhancing one's own research and writing.

Q & A

  • What was the main purpose of the test conducted in the video?

    -The main purpose of the test was to evaluate the effectiveness of five different AI content detection bypass services by using an original PhD abstract and its rewritten versions.

  • Which service did the presenter initially use to check the original PhD abstract?

    -The presenter initially used Turnitin, Originality, and GP0 to check the original PhD abstract.

  • What were the results of the initial AI detection of the PhD abstract?

    -The results showed that the PhD abstract was not AI-generated, with Turnitin indicating a 0% AI likelihood, Originality a 0% AI likelihood, and GP0 a 0% AI likelihood.

  • Which service did the presenter find to be the best at detecting AI content?

    -The presenter found Originality to be the best at detecting AI content.

  • How did the presenter ensure that the AI bypass tools were not just detecting copied content from websites?

    -The presenter ensured this by putting all the outputs from the AI bypass tools into a Word document, saving it, and then using the text from there when pasting it into the AI detection services.

  • What was the result of using the Fasley AI bypass tool on the PhD abstract?

    -The Fasley AI bypass tool managed to get around AI detection, with Turnitin scoring it as 0% AI likelihood, Originality as 2% AI likelihood, and GP0 as 0% AI likelihood.

  • Which AI bypass tool was found to be the most effective at deceiving the AI detection services?

    -Undetectable was found to be the most effective, as it was able to get past Turnitin and GP0 with a 0% AI likelihood, and Originality with only a 2% AI likelihood.

  • What was the presenter's recommendation on using AI bypass tools for academic work?

    -The presenter recommended not to simply copy and paste the output from AI bypass tools for submission, but to use them as a scaffold to build upon with one's own understanding, paraphrasing, and information.

  • What did the presenter conclude about the AI detection and bypass tools?

    -The presenter concluded that while some tools were effective at bypassing AI detection, none of them provided satisfactory results for natural and academically acceptable content, and that relying solely on these tools for academic work is not advisable.

  • What was the general observation about the quality of the rewritten abstracts by the AI bypass tools?

    -The general observation was that the rewritten abstracts contained some unnatural and odd word choices, which would likely be questioned by academic supervisors or professors familiar with the subject matter.

Outlines

00:00

🔍 AI Detection Bypass Test Results

The paragraph discusses the results of a test conducted on five different AI detection bypass services. The author used their PhD abstract, written in 2011, to ensure it was not AI-generated. The abstract was then tested on various platforms such as Turnitin, GP0, Originality, and others to measure the likelihood of it being AI content. The results showed that the PhD abstract was not flagged as AI-generated by all services. The author then used ChatGPT to rewrite the abstract, and the results varied significantly across the services. Turnitin performed poorly in detecting AI content, while Originality was the most effective. The author paid for all the services to provide an unbiased review and concluded that while some tools were successful in bypassing AI detection, it's important to not simply submit AI-generated content as one's own. Instead, it should be used as a scaffold for understanding and creating original work.

05:01

📝 Evaluating AI Bypass Tools and Their Effectiveness

This paragraph delves into the evaluation of AI bypass tools, focusing on their ability to evade detection by AI content checking services. The author discusses the testing of five such tools: Fasley, Stealth Writer, Undetected, Bypass AI, and Hicks Bypass. The results varied, with Fasley and Undetected showing the best performance in avoiding detection by Turnitin and Originality, while Bypass AI and Hicks Bypass also managed to trick Turnitin but were less effective with Originality. The author emphasizes that these tools should not be used to pass off AI-generated content as one's own but rather as a starting point for creating original work. The paragraph concludes with a warning against the misuse of these tools and a suggestion to use them responsibly to enhance one's understanding and work.

Mindmap

Keywords

💡AI Content Detection

AI Content Detection refers to the use of artificial intelligence algorithms to identify and evaluate whether a piece of content has been generated by AI or written by a human. In the context of the video, AI content detection tools are employed to determine if the rewritten abstracts are identifiable as AI-generated by their systems. The video discusses the effectiveness of various services in bypassing these detection systems.

💡PhD Abstract

A PhD Abstract is a brief summary of the research conducted for a Doctor of Philosophy degree. It typically outlines the main problem being addressed, the methodology used, and the key findings. In the video, the presenter uses their own PhD abstract, written in 2011 without AI assistance, as a starting point to test AI detection services and then rewrites it using AI tools to see if the rewritten versions can pass as human-written.

💡Turnitin

Turnitin is a widely used plagiarism detection service that helps educators determine the originality of student submissions. It compares the text against a vast database of content to identify matches. In the video, Turnitin is one of the AI detection tools tested to see how well it can identify AI-generated content as opposed to human-written work.

💡GPT-0

GPT-0 is mentioned in the video as one of the AI detection tools used to determine the likelihood that a piece of content is AI-generated. It seems to focus on the probability of the text being produced by AI, with a higher percentage indicating a greater likelihood of AI authorship. The video shows that GPT-0 gave a high probability of the AI-generated abstracts being identified as such.

💡Originality

Originality, in the context of the video, refers to the AI detection tool's ability to determine if content is unique and not generated by AI. The Originality tool is one of the services tested, and it is highlighted as being particularly adept at detecting AI-generated content, even after the content has been processed by AI bypass tools.

💡AI Bypass Tools

AI Bypass Tools are services designed to alter or manipulate AI-generated content so that it can evade detection by AI content detection systems. The video presents a series of tests using various AI bypass tools to rewrite the PhD abstract and assesses their effectiveness in tricking AI detection tools into believing the content is human-written.

💡Fasley

Fasley is one of the AI bypass tools tested in the video. It is a service that claims to help users get their AI-generated content past AI detection systems. The video shows that Fasley was successful in reducing the detection of AI content by Turnitin but was not as effective as other tools like Undetectable and Phrase in evading the Originality tool.

💡Stealth Writer

Stealth Writer is another AI bypass tool mentioned in the video. It is designed to humanize AI-generated content to make it appear as though it was written by a human. The video demonstrates that Stealth Writer was able to completely bypass Turnitin's detection but was identified as AI-generated by the Originality tool.

💡Undetectable

Undetectable is an AI bypass tool that the video describes as one of the best for getting around AI content detection. It rewrites content to make it seem more human-like. The results from the video indicate that Undetectable was the most successful in deceiving the Originality tool, with only a 2% chance of being identified as AI-generated.

💡Bypass AI

Bypass AI is an AI bypass tool that the video's creator accidentally purchased a year's subscription for. It is designed to help users submit AI-generated content without it being detected as such by AI detection systems. However, in the video, Bypass AI did not perform well in tricking the Originality tool, which detected a 100% chance of AI content.

💡Hick Bypass

Hick Bypass is an AI bypass tool mentioned in the video, which the creator used to test the latest model for its effectiveness in avoiding AI content detection. The results showed that Hick Bypass was able to fool Turnitin but was detected by the Originality tool with a 56% chance of being AI-generated.

Highlights

The presenter tested five best services to bypass AI detection.

The initial abstract was written for a PhD in 2011 without AI.

Originality and Turnitin detected the PhD abstract as non-AI generated.

Chat GPT was used to rewrite the abstract.

Turnitin was not effective at detecting AI content.

Originality was the best at detecting AI content.

Fasley AI was able to bypass AI detection tools effectively.

Stealth Writer humanized text was not detected by Turnitin and GP0.

Undetectable had the lowest detection rate on Turnitin and Originality.

Bypass AI failed to trick Originality, which detected a 100% AI chance.

Hick Bypass showed a 0% AI chance on Turnitin but a 56% chance on Originality.

Originality and GP0 are considered essential tools for content checks.

The presenter advises against submitting AI-generated content as one's own.

AI content should be used as a scaffold for understanding and original work.

The presenter suggests using undetectable and phrase-based tools for content scaffolding.

The video concludes with advice on ethical use of AI content generation tools.

Create Stunning AI Art Instantly

No login. No cost. Just incredible AI images !

Create Stunning AI Art InstantlyGenerate Now