Classic prose "Moonlight on the Lotus Pond," created nearly a century ago, has recently been rated by an AI detection tool as having an "AI generation rate of over 60%", a ridiculous result that quickly sparked heated online discussions. In response to this phenomenon, technical experts in the relevant field clearly pointed out that this indicates a fundamental misunderstanding among the public regarding the concept of "AI rate."

Experts explained that the 60% detected refers to a 60% probability that the entire article was generated by AI as a whole, rather than 60% of the text being written by AI. The core reason why such literary masterpieces are labeled as high-risk is because they have long been used as underlying materials for training AI large models.

Classic masterpieces frequently become victims of algorithms

Because AI detection works by comparing text vocabulary with model predictions, and large models are extremely familiar with the expressions in works like "Moonlight on the Lotus Pond," this leads to excessively high consistency and false alarms. It's not only Zhu Ziqing's works that have been affected; fragments of Liu Cixin's "The Wandering Earth" have also been detected with an AI rate exceeding 50%, while "Preface to the Pavilion of Prince Teng" was even marked as 100% AI-generated.

Differences between detection platforms' algorithms also lead to significant variations in results, with differences in detection values for the same article reaching up to 30%. Additionally, the accuracy of detection is strongly related to the length of the text, and results usually have some reference value only when the text is around 500 words.

Maintaining a unique writing style to counter probability misjudgment

With the popularity of AI detection tools, a gray industry has emerged in the market, offering services to generate AI content and then reduce the AI rate. This method of avoiding detection by replacing frequent words is essentially just an ongoing technological battle.

Experts emphasize that the results given by AI detection tools are always just probabilities and should never be used as the sole standard for judging the originality of an article. For creators and students who often face the dilemma of proving their innocence, maintaining a distinctive personal writing style is the best way to counter algorithmic misjudgment.