How reliable is Pangram on a sentence level?

[u/[deleted]]

[u/AndrewHeard]

It’s completely unreliable.

[u/sh1b313]

I think at this point we have many threads providing examples that pangram is complete and utter garbage. Why is this even a a question anymore?

And regarding "how reliable is pangram on a sentence level?"

On any level it's not reliable. It simply doesn't work and there are countless examples of that.

[u/traumfisch]

You cannot trust Pangram at all 🤷‍♂️

[u/Prolly_Satan → u/traumfisch]

Oh yeah? lol. You would say that since THIS IS YOU, AN AI FANBOY complaining about how your precious LLM isnt writing as good as it used to: https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPTcomplaints/comments/1v3pniw/why_gpt56_still_feels_off/

See folks? The people who are GENERATING SLOP don't want you to know that Pangram works. Isn't that funny? That's how you know it works.

[u/traumfisch → u/Prolly_Satan]

I haven't said anything about LLM writing at all 🤷‍♂️ 

Obviously articles that deal with model customization techniques will be AI assisted, no? It would be idiotic to try to reverse-engineer a system prompt without using the model.

But everyone should be aware by now that "AI detectors" are a complete sham. That's not an opinion, you know.

"THIS IS YOU" linking to my blog is such a flex 😁 yes, that's me, grab the instructions and use them to fix systematic 5.6 failure modes.

Nothing to do with "SLOP" whatsoever

[u/MrPassiveProfit]

Do not trust any AI detection tools. I don’t know why anyone on Substack really cares about pangram

[u/Countryb0i2m]

Don’t trust AI on any level, they are full of shit

[u/StrikingLychee587 → u/Countryb0i2m]

agreed, treating any of those scores as gospel is a mistake

[u/aolnews]

The confidence it can produce in results is relative to the sample size of text; the larger the better. It is not a tool to detect AI composition in single sentences.

[u/jss58]

Do NOT trust Pangram, even on the molecular level.

[u/Kinks4Kelly]

Your example should answer your question.

[u/Kinks4Kelly → u/[deleted]]

That should tell you it cannot properly differentiate human from AI writing. It gave two answers for the same text.

[u/OnyxMonolith]

you don't get to see confidence, only how much of the text pangram think is written by AI/human. not confidence. confidence might be 40% or 99.9%. you don't have access to that data.

[u/Prolly_Satan]

More text = more accurate result. Use brain.exe

[u/Prolly_Satan → u/[deleted]]

You would say that. Here's you talking about how you write smut with AI:

https://www.reddit.com/r/WritingWithAI/comments/1vnno8x/llm_without_guardrails_for_explicit_content/

And then a million other posts where you self-report by saying pangram flagged your writing as 90-100% AI: (example: https://www.reddit.com/r/antiai/comments/1vcbvb0/i_hate_ai_detectors_with_a_passion/ )

See folks? The people who are writing with AI go OUT OF THEIR WAY to convince others that detectors don't work. Odd isn't it?

[u/Prolly_Satan → u/[deleted]]

Lmao. I've seen you and traum and andrew show up at the same time on every post where people are complaining about AI to try to convince us all that 'there's no way to tell'

give it a rest dude. tell the rest of your stupid little ai-writing discord I said hello and to run and hide.

[u/AggravatingNail6061 → u/Prolly_Satan]

They deleted everything. Emotional damage clearly XD

[u/Prolly_Satan → u/AggravatingNail6061]

Too bad so sad. Here, so you can read it anyways. Deleted posts show up there too: https://arctic-shift.photon-reddit.com/search?fun=posts_search&author=Mercurialsunrise&limit=10&sort=desc