AI-Language models such as Chat GPT, Google Bard and others are taking the world by storm and slowly becoming an integral part of our lives. However, as they are becoming part of our everyday life, certain issues have started to arise. Indeed, instead of simply using them as a guide, many people have started to solely rely on AI tools to write their essays or other important documents. This brings a whole new bunch of issues to the table. Should this be considered plagiarising? Will people stop creating original content? And many more. 

To remedy this growing issue, some websites claim to have created tools capable of identifying AI-generated text. However, a question arises: Are AI detectors trustworthy? Do they actually do a good job?  In this article, we will explore the reliability of AI detectors and delve into the ethical considerations surrounding their use.

The Reliability of AI Detectors

AI detectors are designed to analyse vast amounts of data and identify specific patterns or anomalies. Their reliability depends on several factors, including the quality of the training data, the robustness of the algorithm, and the system's ability to adapt to changing circumstances. While AI detectors can offer impressive accuracy, they are not infallible.

Training Data

AI detectors rely on vast datasets to learn and make predictions. The quality and diversity of the training data greatly influence their reliability. Biases or limitations present in the training data can result in biassed or inaccurate outcomes, leading to false positives or negatives. Ensuring representative and unbiased datasets is crucial to enhance the trustworthiness of AI detectors.

Algorithmic Robustness

The underlying algorithms used in AI detectors must be carefully designed, tested, and validated to ensure their reliability. Transparency and explainability of algorithms are essential, as they help identify potential flaws or biases. Regular updates and improvements to the algorithms can enhance the reliability of AI detectors over time.


The ability of AI detectors to adapt to new and evolving circumstances is crucial. Real-world situations may present variations and challenges that the detectors were not initially trained for. Regular monitoring, feedback loops, and retraining of the AI models can help address these challenges and improve the reliability of the detectors.


While AI detectors offer promising benefits, their deployment also raises many concerns that need to be addressed.


AI detectors often rely on large amounts of personal data to make accurate predictions. Proper data governance practices, including data anonymisation, encryption, and consent-based data collection, should be implemented to protect individuals' privacy rights.

Bias and Discrimination

AI detectors can inadvertently perpetuate biases present in the training data, leading to discriminatory outcomes. Indeed, as they learn through analysing content already present online, they might stumble upon and learn from content containing false information or intentionally sexist, racist, xenophobic or other discriminatory information. Careful attention should be paid to ensure fairness and mitigate biases, both in the training data and the algorithmic design. Regular audits and external reviews can help identify and rectify any biases present in AI detectors.

Accountability and Transparency

Clear accountability mechanisms should be established to address the consequences of AI detector errors or misuse. Transparency in the decision-making processes of AI detectors is vital to build trust and ensure responsible use.

Human Oversight

While AI detectors can automate certain processes, human oversight and intervention remain crucial. Humans can provide context, interpret nuanced situations, and ensure the ethical use of AI detectors. While AI tools are trained using massive amounts of data, one might question whether or not they can compete with a human in the processing and understanding of said data. Indeed, they can identify trends and make hypotheses, but what if someone writes in a similar style to a certain AI tool? In addition, AI-language models keep evolving and getting better. Are AI-detection tools really going to keep up as AI-language models get closer and closer to sounding totally human? Difficult to say!

Case study

In order to form a better idea of what AI detectors are capable of, we decided to put a random one to the test. We googled “ AI detection tool” and clicked a random link. We landed on ZeroGPT, a website that claims to be able to “ to detect text's source whether it derives from AI tools (like ChatGPT, Google Bard, ...) or human brain.”. We submitted a blog article we wrote for a client more than a year ago (months before the release and popularisation of AI-language models.

We chose this article rather than a recent one to make sure that there would be no way we could have been influenced by any content written using AI while doing our research and writing for said article. In simple terms, this article is guaranteed 100% AI-free!

To our surprise, the detector came back with a presumed result of 44.75% AI content! In other terms, this detector thinks that almost half of our human-written blog article was written by AI. Obviously, this is the result of only one detector. Other ones might come out with different results. But we believe this casts a fair amount of doubt over the legitimacy of these detectors. We are unsure that they are as good as they are presented to be. This can be a big issue considering they are now used to try and detect the use of AI in academic settings, which is already leading to false accusations of plagiarism in many universities across the world (check this article to learn more).

In conclusion, AI detectors hold great potential in various domains, but it remains unclear whether or not they are truly reliable yet and whether they will remain relevant for long. Unfortunately, only time will tell.

For more AI content, check out our AI content here. For any help with your digital marketing strategy, get in contact with us.