I find Originality.AI very easy to use and the results are consistent, which is great when reviewing papers for my class. I also appreciate the continuous product improvement, which shows the developers are committed to enhancing the service over time. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I would like to be able to download deep scan results. Also, I want to be able to select the model without having to go to preferences; placing it in the sidebar would be more convenient. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

What's great is its accuracy: it often manages to identify texts that are 100% from ChatGPT or other AI. It seems more reliable than many competitors for truly filtering them out. Plus, the interface is super simple; you copy, you paste, and you get the score instantly, without any hassle. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

The major drawback is that the score isn't always perfect. Sometimes it gives a false positive on text clearly written by a human, or it misses something obvious that the AI ​​would do. This forces you to double-check. Also, it lacks features or direct integrations to scan entire websites without having to copy and paste page by page. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Quick check for ai and plagiarism. Easy to use and view. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Grammar check is trash. Did not detect grammatical issues with precision. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I like the accuracy of the results provided by Originality.AI, which is crucial for finalizing my literature review and ensuring my research remains plagiarism-free. I also appreciate that it integrates other useful tools aside from just plagiarism testing. Additionally, the initial setup was much easy. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I think a potential improvement for Originality.AI would be to enhance its credibility by demonstrating if its results can compete with more established, officially recognized plagiarism detection tools. Also, while it allows me to explore the history and see the step-by-step process of evaluating my content, I wonder if it could make this aspect more insightful. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

it is good for running detection using this and it is close to turnitin. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

the payment method needs improving. u will need to pay before u can run ur test. IMO, although it is ok to pay for it but the pricing and price plan it is kinda misleading. some says per month and the other says per annual. the cancellation of price plan took me awhile to figure it out via google and the chatbot works but took awhile as well. overall it is a "ok" to use but it really depends if u are ok with the pay first use later concept. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I like the amount of options Originality.AI offers. It helps me by ensuring I do not get accused of using AI, which is important for school assignments and discussions. I find it helpful that you can check AI writing and plagiarism easily. Plus, setting it up was very easy. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I don't like that it's hard to know the different checks or the difference between the versions. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I have found Originality.AI to be a valuable tool for assessing originality in research papers and student assignments. I like its AI and plagiarism detection features. It is unique for AI detection and handles this well. I appreciate that the initial setup was easy. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I think I have time to record struggles. It is great to make a percentage of AI detection, but will this feature stand as it is with frequent usage? This is what I will see with time. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Originality.AI is great at detecting AI-generated content and traditional plagiarism. Its simple, user-friendly interface makes it easy to use, even for beginners. This tool is especially helpful for agencies, publishers, and content strategists who handle a lot of written work and need to ensure quality. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

While Originality.AI is reliable, there can be occasional false positives or unclear AI scores, particularly with heavily edited or technical content. The credit-based pricing model might not fit users who prefer unlimited scanning. The integration options with popular CMS platforms like WordPress or Notion could be broader. Furthermore, while the tool provides team features, user permissions and admin controls could be more customizable for larger organizations. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Faith was giving really quick responses and good matching with my usage reason. After finding correct model price and result is really good Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

interface would be better. It felt bit so mixed and not super userfriendly Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I really appreciate the wide reach of Originality.AI in AI detection, which was a significant factor in my decision to try the tool. The setup process was seamless and straightforward, making it easy to start using right away. Additionally, Originality.AI provides functionalities like a plagiarism checker and reference checker, which are quite useful for my work. They meet my needs sufficiently, without the need for any specific functionalities. Moreover, integration with tools like Undetectable has been beneficial, offering humanizing options and highlighting areas where AI is prominent, which complements my use of Originality.AI. It's promising in the current AI-driven world where reducing the AI impact in content creation is crucial. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Navigating the platform was a bit challenging. I found that it could be more effective in detecting AI usage and fact-checking references. While it works well enough, it's only been somewhat useful for me, and I am still determining how I feel about it overall. Possible additional features could be highlighting the exact spots where AI is detected and providing ways to rewrite those sections. Additionally, the questions asked seemed repetitive, which was frustrating. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.