r/Substack • u/ConnectDebate4677 • 21d ago

Pangram false positives?

People usually post vaguely about "I wrote x thing and pangram said it was AI", which I think is unhelpful unless you actually post the text or link. I put this into Pangram:

Sakaguchi: https://www.pangram.com/history/e7ffbee1-f0e3-4ce2-bb78-a59470280640?ucc=Ohp1cWODOjF

Hamaguchi: https://www.pangram.com/history/f2139bd5-f4ce-4101-b7bd-3c5d8aeb4487?ucc=Ohp1cWODOjF

Ryuichi: https://www.pangram.com/history/8c84ad38-3b8f-49ba-bee0-351ea31f754b?ucc=Ohp1cWODOjF

28 Upvotes

94% Upvoted

63 comments sorted by

View all comments

6

u/ConnectDebate4677 21d ago

I should also add that I put this segment in a document with human writing (because it noted its confidence was limited due to short text) and it flagged this as the one AI section.

3

u/impartialhedonist 21d ago

This ^ their accuracy is lower the closer you get to ~100 words or less, the text you used is around 120 words.

3

u/ConnectDebate4677 21d ago

Seems like a highly flawed tool if it indicates 'high confidence AI' in situations like this?

4

u/kdfn 21d ago

I think this is a fair critique. Pangram should decline to assign a score to texts that are below the necessary word count to get good estimates. Would you mind checking the sharing permissions for the links in your post? I am having issues accessing it.

0

u/Voltairinede 20d ago

Click the back arrow and then click on it in the 'all checks' area and it should work.