{"id":1047,"date":"2026-07-30T19:35:55","date_gmt":"2026-07-30T19:35:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/?p=1047"},"modified":"2026-07-30T19:35:57","modified_gmt":"2026-07-30T19:35:57","slug":"best-ai-detector-for-essays","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/best-ai-detector-for-essays\/","title":{"rendered":"Best AI Detector for Essays: 9 Tools Tested Against Independent Data"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Vendors love to advertise 97 to 99% accuracy<\/strong>. Then Scribbr ran the same tools through a standardized corpus and the numbers cratered: Originality.ai landed at 76%, Copyleaks at 66%, and GPTZero at just 52%<\/strong>. That gap is why I built this roundup around independent benchmarks instead of marketing pages.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To find the best AI detector for essays<\/strong>, I ranked 8 tools on third-party data (Scribbr’s 12-tool test, the RAID benchmark, Stanford’s TOEFL study, and Chicago Booth’s false-positive research) plus the thing most reviews skip: fairness<\/strong>. Each tool gets a “best for” tag so students checking their own work and educators screening submissions can both find their pick.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

One framing to set up front, because it shapes everything below.<\/strong> A detector score is a likelihood signal, not proof of cheating. The stakes are real: a Georgia student lost her HOPE scholarship over a single Grammarly-triggered flag, and 12+ universities have switched Turnitin’s detector off entirely<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

An at-a-glance comparison table comes first, then a short how-it-works explainer, then the 9 reviews and my verdict.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

How AI Detectors Actually Work: Perplexity, Burstiness, and Why Watermarking Failed<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Tool<\/th>Best for<\/th>Free tier<\/th>Starting price<\/th>Independent accuracy<\/th>ESL false-positive note<\/th><\/tr><\/thead>
GPTZero<\/strong><\/td>Educators & students<\/td>10,000 words\/mo<\/td>$14.99\/mo<\/td>RAID 95.7% recall @1% FPR; Scribbr 52%<\/td>1.1% FPR on TOEFL after de-biasing<\/td><\/tr>
Originality.ai<\/strong><\/td>Publishers & paraphrase<\/td>None (50 credits)<\/td>$14.95\/mo<\/td>Scribbr 76%; RAID adversarial 96.7%<\/td>No published ESL de-bias<\/td><\/tr>
Copyleaks<\/strong><\/td>Multilingual \/ enterprise<\/td>25,000 chars\/scan<\/td>$13.99\/mo<\/td>Scribbr 66%; 41% humanized<\/td>Extra Safe mode 0.009% FPR<\/td><\/tr>
Turnitin<\/strong><\/td>Institutions<\/td>Institutional only<\/td>Institutional<\/td>Vendor <1% (only >20% AI)<\/td>61.3% ESL FPR (Stanford)<\/td><\/tr>
Winston AI<\/strong><\/td>Budget agencies\/educators<\/td>None<\/td>$10\/mo (annual)<\/td>75 to 85% independent vs 99.98% claim<\/td>Moderate; not detailed<\/td><\/tr>
Scribbr<\/strong><\/td>Quick student pre-check<\/td>Unlimited up to 1,200 words<\/td>Free<\/td>Shares GPTZero engine<\/td>Inherits GPTZero<\/td><\/tr>
QuillBot<\/strong><\/td>QuillBot-ecosystem students<\/td>Under 1,200 words<\/td>Free<\/td>98% raw, collapses to 12% humanized<\/td>Moderate<\/td><\/tr>
ZeroGPT<\/strong><\/td>Zero-friction free<\/td>15,000 chars<\/td>Free<\/td>Scribbr 64%<\/td>Up to 28% FPR<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Almost every detector keys on two statistical signals<\/strong>. Understand them and you can read any score in this article with the right amount of suspicion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n
  • Perplexity:<\/strong> AI text is statistically predictable. When a model picks the most likely next word again and again, the result has low “surprise,”<\/strong> and detectors flag that low-perplexity pattern as machine-written.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  • Burstiness:<\/strong> Humans vary. We alternate short punchy sentences with long winding ones, simple words with rare ones. AI stays uniform<\/strong>, and detectors measure that flat variance.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  • Watermarking:<\/strong> This was supposed to be the clean solution, statistical signals baked in at generation time. It never deployed at scale<\/strong>, and a quick paraphrase strips it out, so detectors fall back on perplexity and burstiness anyway.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

    That fallback is fragile. A 2025 ArXiv study found adversarial paraphrasing cut detection rates by an average of 87.88%<\/strong> across every major detector type. And because these signals reward “predictable, simple” writing, they structurally misfire on ESL writers<\/strong> and plain, formal prose. That problem is big enough to deserve its own section, which is next.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Why a Score Is a Signal, Not a Sentence: False Positives and ESL Bias<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

    Marley Stevens, a student at the University of North Georgia, used Grammarly for grammar fixes on a criminal justice paper. Turnitin flagged it, she got a zero, landed on academic probation, and lost her HOPE Scholarship eligibility<\/strong>. No AI was involved. That is the cost of treating a score as a verdict.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The ESL bias is documented and severe. Stanford’s Liang et al. (2023) found that seven detectors falsely flagged non-native English TOEFL essays as AI at an average rate of 61.3%<\/strong>, with 97.8% flagged by at least one tool and 19.8% unanimously misclassified. The root cause is structural: simpler vocabulary and shorter sentences produce the same low-perplexity signature AI does<\/strong>. Grammarly use raises the risk too, and the University of Nebraska-Lincoln found elevated false positives among students with ADHD and autism<\/strong>, whose repetitive or burst-pattern writing trips the same wire.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Accuracy also depends heavily on length, and collapses on edited text<\/strong>. The ladder across major tools:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      \n
    • ~50 words:<\/strong> 65 to 72% accuracy<\/li>\n\n\n\n
    • 100 words:<\/strong> 78 to 84%<\/li>\n\n\n\n
    • 250 words:<\/strong> 88 to 93%<\/li>\n\n\n\n
    • 500+ words:<\/strong> plateaus near the tool’s ceiling<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

      Short essays are simply unreliable to scan.<\/strong> Perkins et al. (2024) measured baseline accuracy at just 39.5%<\/strong> across six detectors, dropping to 22.1% with light manual editing<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      The institutions noticed. A growing list has disabled Turnitin’s AI detector outright<\/strong>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        \n
      • Vanderbilt<\/li>\n\n\n\n
      • UC Berkeley<\/li>\n\n\n\n
      • Yale<\/li>\n\n\n\n
      • Johns Hopkins<\/li>\n\n\n\n
      • University of Waterloo (September 2025, after internal tests flagged human-written text as “100% AI”<\/strong>)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
      • Curtin University (January 2026)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

        Yale and Michigan also faced student lawsuits over false flags. The takeaway repeats through this whole roundup: a detector gives a signal, not a sentence<\/strong>. Pair any score with process evidence (draft history, keystroke recording, Turnitin Clarity).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        With that ceiling in mind, here are the eight tools.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        1. GPTZero: Best Overall for Educators and Students<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
        \"GPTZero<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

        GPTZero is my top pick<\/strong>, and the only tool here that detects GPT-5 at 100%<\/strong> while still offering a real free tier. It earns the slot on the strongest independent standalone benchmark plus the most generous free allowance in the roundup.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Best for:<\/strong> educators and students.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Pros<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
          \n
        • Free tier:<\/strong> 10,000 words\/month, the most generous reputable free allowance<\/strong> here.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        • Independent accuracy:<\/strong> RAID benchmark 95.7% recall at 1% FPR<\/strong>, the best independent standalone result in this lineup.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        • Latest models:<\/strong> GPT-5 detection 100%<\/strong>, GPT-5-mini 94.9%, Claude Sonnet 4 99%.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        • ESL fairness:<\/strong> de-biasing brings the TOEFL false-positive rate down to 1.1%<\/strong>.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        • Authorship proof:<\/strong> Writing Replay records the keystroke and drafting process via a Google Docs extension.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        • Compliance and LMS:<\/strong> FERPA and SOC2 Type II; integrates with Canvas, Moodle, and Google Classroom.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

          Cons<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
            \n
          • Humanized text:<\/strong> only 52%<\/strong> on QuillBot-paraphrased AI in Scribbr’s test, the same weak spot that drags its overall Scribbr score to 52%.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
          • Real-world false positives:<\/strong> around 15%<\/strong> in some real-world university testing on student essays.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

            Pricing<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
              \n
            • Free:<\/strong> 10,000 words\/month (sign-up required)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
            • Essential:<\/strong> $14.99\/month (150,000 words)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
            • Professional:<\/strong> $45.99\/month (500,000 words)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

              The honest read on accuracy is the spread itself<\/strong>. RAID puts GPTZero at 95.7% on fresh AI text, but Scribbr’s corpus, which includes edited and humanized writing, drops it to 52%. Best for<\/strong> educators who want compliance plus free volume and students who want a free pre-check before submitting. Skip it if<\/strong> your main threat is paraphrased or humanized text, where Originality.ai is stronger.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

              2. Originality.ai: Best for Paraphrase Detection and Publishers<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
              \"Originality.ai<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

              Originality.ai once scored the human-written Da Vinci Code as 100% AI<\/strong>, which tells you exactly where its edges are. It is also the best paraphrase-killer<\/strong> in this roundup, with plagiarism and readability bundled in.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

              Best for:<\/strong> content publishers and paraphrase detection.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

              Pros<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
                \n
              • Paraphrase detection:<\/strong> 100% on QuillBot-paraphrased AI text<\/strong>, where GPTZero drops to 52%.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
              • Adversarial robustness:<\/strong> 96.7% on the RAID adversarial dataset.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
              • Academic track record:<\/strong> a meta-analysis of 15 studies put average accuracy at 91 to 100%<\/strong> across academic domains.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
              • Bundle:<\/strong> plagiarism check (claimed 99.5% vs Copyscape’s 68.5%), readability, and fact-checking in one scan, with a Chrome extension and WordPress plugin for workflow.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                Cons<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
                  \n
                • No free tier:<\/strong> only 50 signup credits (about 5,000 words).<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                • GPT-5 blind spot:<\/strong> GPT-5-mini detection just 7.3%<\/strong>, GPT-5 only 31.7%<\/strong>.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                • No compliance:<\/strong> no FERPA, no SOC2, and it auto-opts users into model-training data contribution<\/strong>, a problem for schools.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                • False positives:<\/strong> flagged the Da Vinci Code at 100% AI; Scribbr independent test only 76%.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                  Pricing<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
                    \n
                  • No free tier<\/strong> (50 signup credits)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                  • Pro:<\/strong> $14.95\/month (2,000 credits)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                  • Pay-as-you-go:<\/strong> $30 one-time (3,000 credits)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                    The independent picture splits cleanly<\/strong>. Scribbr put it at 76% overall and RAID adversarial at 96.7%, yet it catches only 31.7% of GPT-5 output, so paraphrase strength and new-model weakness sit side by side. The verdict:<\/strong> great for publishers chasing spun freelance content, wrong tool for an academic-integrity workflow that needs FERPA and GPT-5 coverage.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    3. Copyleaks: Best for Multilingual and Enterprise Scanning<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
                    \"Copyleaks<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

                    Copyleaks is the only pick here that handles 30+ languages<\/strong> and lets you dial false positives up or down<\/strong>. That flexibility is its real selling point, not raw accuracy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    Best for:<\/strong> multilingual and enterprise.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    Pros<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
                      \n
                    • Sensitivity control:<\/strong> three named modes (Extra Safe 0.009% FPR<\/strong>, Balanced 0.026%, Extra Sensitive 0.05%), so false-positive-averse users can tune strictness.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                    • Language coverage:<\/strong> 30+ languages plus multi-modal detection across text, images, video, and source code.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                    • Explainability:<\/strong> an “AI Logic” view surfaces flagged AI phrases and source matches rather than a bare percentage.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                    • Free scan volume:<\/strong> 25,000 characters free per scan, no login.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                      Cons<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
                        \n
                      • Independent accuracy:<\/strong> Scribbr put it at only 66%<\/strong>, a 33-point gap below the 99.12% vendor claim.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                      • Humanized text:<\/strong> drops to 41%<\/strong> on humanized content.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                        Pricing<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
                          \n
                        • Free:<\/strong> 25,000 characters per scan<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                        • Paid:<\/strong> from $13.99\/month (annual) or $16.99\/month<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                          There is a real tradeoff<\/strong> baked into those sensitivity modes. Extra Safe buys you a 0.009% false-positive rate, but overall accuracy already sits at 66% (and 41% on humanized text), so cranking down false positives further trades away recall<\/strong>. Best for<\/strong> multilingual institutions that will actually run Extra Safe mode. Skip it if<\/strong> you need high recall on edited or humanized text.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          4. Turnitin: Best for Institutions, With Serious Caveats<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
                          \"Turnitin<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

                          The tool most schools already pay for is the one most schools are switching off<\/strong>. Turnitin still has the deepest institutional roots, but its AI score now comes with a long list of warnings, several from Turnitin itself.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          Best for:<\/strong> institutions (with caveats).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                          Pros<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
                            \n
                          • LMS integration:<\/strong> the deepest institutional and LMS integration<\/strong> of any tool here, native in Canvas, Blackboard, Moodle, and Google Classroom.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                          • Process evidence:<\/strong> Turnitin Clarity records the writing process (paste events, typing patterns, draft history) and was named a TIME Best Invention 2025<\/strong>, aligning neatly with the “signal, not sentence” thesis.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                            Cons<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
                              \n
                            • ESL bias:<\/strong> Stanford measured a 61.3% false-positive rate<\/strong> on non-native English essays.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                            • Institutions disabling it:<\/strong> 12+ universities<\/strong> turned the detector off, including Vanderbilt, UC Berkeley, Yale, Johns Hopkins, Waterloo (September 2025), and Curtin (January 2026).<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                            • Misleading accuracy claim:<\/strong> the vendor’s <1% false-positive figure only applies when AI content exceeds 20%<\/strong> of a submission.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                            • Access:<\/strong> institutional license only, with no individual signup.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                              Pricing<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
                                \n
                              • Institutional licensing only (no public individual tier)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                              • Clarity available within institutional plans<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                                The independent reality is rough: a 61.3% ESL false-positive rate<\/strong>, and a headline <1% claim that quietly excludes the borderline 1 to 19% range where most disputes happen. The verdict:<\/strong> lean on Clarity’s process recording, distrust the raw AI percentage, and never act on that number alone<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                5. Winston AI: Best for Budget Agencies and Educators<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
                                \"winston<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

                                Winston AI advertises 99.98% accuracy<\/strong>. Independent testing knocks roughly 15 to 25 points off that<\/strong>, which is the recurring vendor-versus-reality story this article keeps telling.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                Best for:<\/strong> budget agencies and educators.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                Pros<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
                                  \n
                                • Price-to-volume:<\/strong> $10\/month (annual) for 80,000 words, the cheapest paid entry here<\/strong>.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                • Extras:<\/strong> Google Classroom integration, OCR for scanned and handwritten work<\/strong>, a color-coded sentence-level AI Prediction Map, and a HUMN-1 human-content badge.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                • Language coverage:<\/strong> 14 languages, useful for mixed-language classrooms.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                                  Cons<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
                                    \n
                                  • Inflated claim:<\/strong> advertises 99.98% but OriginalityReport.com independent testing puts it at 75 to 85%<\/strong>.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                  • No free tier:<\/strong> you have to pay to try it.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                  • Credit model:<\/strong> 1 credit equals 1 word, the least efficient pricing structure<\/strong> among the major tools.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                                    Pricing<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
                                      \n
                                    • No free tier<\/strong><\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                    • $10\/month<\/strong> billed annually for 80,000 words<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                    • $26\/month<\/strong> (annual) for 500,000 words<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                                      Called plainly, the 99.98% number does not survive contact with a real-world corpus<\/strong>, landing closer to 75 to 85%. Cheaper per word than GPTZero Pro, but you trade away the free tier and a verified chunk of accuracy to get there.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                      6. Scribbr: Best for Quick Student Pre-Submission Checks<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
                                      \"Scribbr<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

                                      Paste up to 1,200 words, no account, instant read<\/strong>. Scribbr is the frictionless free option, and it runs on GPTZero’s engine<\/strong>, so its results track a strong independent performer on fresh AI text.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                      Best for:<\/strong> quick student pre-submission.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                      Pros<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
                                        \n
                                      • Free and no signup:<\/strong> unlimited checks up to 1,200 words per scan.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                      • Trusted engine:<\/strong> powered by GPTZero, so accuracy mirrors a tool that hits RAID 95.7%<\/strong> on fresh AI text.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                                        Cons<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
                                          \n
                                        • Length cap:<\/strong> 1,200 words per scan means longer essays get split into chunks.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                        • Shared weakness:<\/strong> inherits GPTZero’s humanized-text blind spot<\/strong> (around 52% in Scribbr’s own test).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                                          Pricing<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
                                            \n
                                          • Free<\/strong>; no paid tier needed for the core checker<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                                            Because it shares GPTZero’s engine, it shares both the strength (RAID 95.7%) and the weakness (52% on humanized text). Best for<\/strong> a student spot-checking a draft before submitting. Skip it if<\/strong> you need to scan a full thesis in a single pass.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                            7. QuillBot: Best for Students Already in the QuillBot Ecosystem<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
                                            \"QuillBot<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

                                            The maker of one of the web’s most popular paraphrasers ships a detector that its own paraphraser reliably defeats<\/strong>. That irony is also QuillBot’s biggest flaw.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                            Best for:<\/strong> students already in the QuillBot ecosystem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                            Pros<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
                                              \n
                                            • Free for short text:<\/strong> free for texts under 1,200 words, no signup.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                            • In-suite convenience:<\/strong> integrated with QuillBot’s paraphrasing, summarizing, and grammar tools.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                                              Cons<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
                                                \n
                                              • Worst humanized collapse:<\/strong> accuracy falls from 98% on raw AI to just 12% on humanized content<\/strong>, an 86-point drop and the steepest here.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                              • Self-defeating:<\/strong> the same company’s paraphraser reliably beats the detector.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                                                Pricing<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
                                                  \n
                                                • Free<\/strong> under 1,200 words<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                                • Bundled in QuillBot Premium (from $8.33\/month<\/strong> annual) for batch upload<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                                                  The 98%-to-12% collapse<\/strong> on humanized text tells you everything about its evidentiary value. The verdict:<\/strong> fine as a convenience check inside the QuillBot suite, useless as evidence<\/strong>, especially against paraphrased text.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                                  8. ZeroGPT: Best for Zero-Friction Free Checks (Honorable Mention)<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
                                                  \"zerogpt<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

                                                  A short honorable mention, because ZeroGPT shows up constantly in search results and you deserve an honest read. A 28% false-positive rate<\/strong> means roughly one in four innocent essays could get flagged<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                                  Best for:<\/strong> zero-friction free checks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                                  Pros<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
                                                    \n
                                                  • Free and instant:<\/strong> 15,000 characters, no signup.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                                                    Cons<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
                                                      \n
                                                    • Weak accuracy:<\/strong> 64% in Scribbr’s test.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                                    • High false positives:<\/strong> up to 28% FPR<\/strong> in some independent assessments.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                                    • No published validation:<\/strong> no transparent benchmark data.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                                                      Pricing<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
                                                        \n
                                                      • Free<\/strong>, 15,000 characters, no signup<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                                                        Use it for a throwaway gut-check. For anything that actually matters, Scribbr (also free, no signup) is the more trustworthy pick<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                                        The Verdict: Which AI Essay Detector Should You Use?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

                                                        After eight reviews, here is where I land, mapped to who you are:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                                        Quick picks by use case<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
                                                          \n
                                                        • Best overall \/ most accurate free detector:<\/strong> GPTZero (RAID 95.7%, 10,000 free words, 100% on GPT-5).<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                                        • Lowest false positives \/ ESL fairness:<\/strong> Copyleaks in Extra Safe mode (0.009% FPR), with GPTZero as the free alternative after de-biasing (1.1% FPR on TOEFL essays).<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                                        • Best for paraphrase \/ publishers:<\/strong> Originality.ai (100% on QuillBot-paraphrased text), with the GPT-5 caveat.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                                        • Multilingual \/ enterprise:<\/strong> Copyleaks, for 30+ language coverage and multi-modal scanning.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                                        • Institutions:<\/strong> Turnitin, but only via Clarity’s process recording, never the raw score.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                                        • Quick free student check:<\/strong> Scribbr.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
                                                        • Avoid for high-stakes decisions:<\/strong> QuillBot (98% to 12% humanized collapse) and ZeroGPT (28% FPR).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

                                                          The core thesis holds across every one of these. No detector is accurate enough to prove misconduct.<\/strong> Vendor 97 to 99% claims collapse under Scribbr’s independent test (Originality 76%, Copyleaks 66%, GPTZero 52%), adversarial paraphrasing cuts detection by roughly 87.88%, and ESL essays were falsely flagged 61.3% of the time in the Stanford study.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                                          So treat any score as a signal, not a sentence<\/strong>, and pair it with process evidence (draft history, Writing Replay, Turnitin Clarity). One concrete next step: if you are a student, run a free check before you submit<\/strong>. If you are an educator, corroborate with process evidence before you ever accuse<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                                          AI Essay Detector FAQ: Accuracy, ESL Bias, and What to Do If Falsely Flagged<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

                                                          Are AI detectors accurate enough to prove academic misconduct?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

                                                          No.<\/strong> Vendor claims of 97 to 99% collapse to 52 to 76%<\/strong> in Scribbr’s independent testing, and Perkins et al. (2024) measured baseline accuracy at just 39.5%. Turnitin’s own documentation warns its score should never be the sole basis for adverse student action<\/strong>, and 12+ universities have disabled detection over reliability concerns. A score can support an investigation, but it cannot prove how text was written.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                                          Do AI detectors work on paraphrased text?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

                                                          Poorly.<\/strong> A 2025 ArXiv study found adversarial paraphrasing cut detection rates by an average of 87.88%<\/strong> across all major detectors, and Perkins et al. (2024) saw accuracy fall from 39.5% to 22.1% with light editing. QuillBot’s own detector drops from 98% to 12% on humanized text. Originality.ai is the main exception<\/strong> at 100% on QuillBot-paraphrased content, though even it degrades on aggressively humanized writing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                                          Are AI detectors biased against ESL students?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

                                                          Yes, significantly.<\/strong> Stanford’s Liang et al. (2023) found 61.3% of non-native English TOEFL essays falsely flagged<\/strong>, because simpler vocabulary and shorter sentences mimic the low-perplexity signature detectors hunt for. This is the AI detector false positives problem at its sharpest. Copyleaks Extra Safe mode<\/strong> (0.009% FPR) and GPTZero after de-biasing<\/strong> (1.1% FPR on TOEFL essays) are the fairer options.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                                          What is the most accurate free AI detector?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

                                                          GPTZero<\/strong>, thanks to a 10,000-words-per-month free tier, RAID 95.7% recall, and ESL de-biasing down to 1.1% on TOEFL essays. It is the strongest free option for students who want a real pre-submission check with sentence-level feedback. Scribbr is the best no-signup alternative<\/strong>, running GPTZero’s engine with unlimited scans up to 1,200 words.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                                          Does a high AI score prove cheating?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

                                                          No.<\/strong> A high score signals statistical likelihood that text resembles AI output, nothing more. It can be triggered by ESL writing patterns, heavy Grammarly editing, formal academic style, short length<\/strong>, or simply writing about a well-trodden topic. Treat it as a prompt for human review, then pair it with process evidence before drawing any conclusion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                                          Can AI detectors detect GPT-5?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

                                                          It depends entirely on the tool.<\/strong> GPTZero detects GPT-5 at 100%<\/strong> and GPT-5-mini at 94.9%, while Originality.ai catches GPT-5 at only 31.7%<\/strong> and GPT-5-mini at a critical 7.3%<\/strong>. Since GPT-5-mini was the most popular OpenAI model in mid-2026, that gap matters. Tools that retrain frequently keep pace; others go effectively blind to new models.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                                                          What should I do if I’m falsely accused?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

                                                          Gather process evidence first:<\/strong> Google Docs version history, timestamped drafts, research notes, outlines, and keystroke records (Writing Replay or Turnitin Clarity). If you are an ESL writer, cite the Stanford study showing a 61.3% false-positive rate<\/strong> on TOEFL essays and document your language background. Then submit a written rebuttal noting that 12+ universities have disabled these detectors<\/strong>, and request a human review. These AI detector false positives are well documented, and that precedent works in your favor.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

                                                          Vendors love to advertise 97 to 99% accuracy. Then Scribbr ran the same tools through a standardized corpus and the numbers cratered: Originality.ai landed at 76%, Copyleaks at 66%, and GPTZero at just 52%. That gap is why I built this roundup around independent benchmarks instead of marketing pages. To find the best AI detector […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1047","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-ai-tools"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\nBest AI Detector for Essays: 9 Tools Tested Against Independent Data - AI Tutor Blog<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Vendors claim 97 to 99% accuracy. Independent tests say 52 to 76%. We ranked 9 AI essay detectors on real benchmarks.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/best-ai-detector-for-essays\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Best AI Detector for Essays: 9 Tools Tested Against Independent Data - AI Tutor Blog\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Vendors claim 97 to 99% accuracy. Independent tests say 52 to 76%. We ranked 9 AI essay detectors on real benchmarks.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/best-ai-detector-for-essays\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"AI Tutor Blog\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-07-30T19:35:55+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-07-30T19:35:57+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/GPTZero-Homepage.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1200\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"630\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Rancea Bogdan\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Rancea Bogdan\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"15 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\\\/best-ai-detector-for-essays\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\\\/best-ai-detector-for-essays\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Rancea Bogdan\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0fa2ce23669135fd25255c6a6b0efd1c\"},\"headline\":\"Best AI Detector for Essays: 9 Tools Tested Against Independent Data\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-07-30T19:35:55+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-07-30T19:35:57+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\\\/best-ai-detector-for-essays\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":2873,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\\\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\\\/best-ai-detector-for-essays\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"http:\\\/\\\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/GPTZero-Homepage-1024x538.jpg\",\"articleSection\":[\"AI Tools\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\\\/best-ai-detector-for-essays\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\\\/best-ai-detector-for-essays\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\\\/best-ai-detector-for-essays\\\/\",\"name\":\"Best AI Detector for Essays: 9 Tools Tested Against Independent Data - AI Tutor Blog\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\\\/best-ai-detector-for-essays\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\\\/best-ai-detector-for-essays\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"http:\\\/\\\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/GPTZero-Homepage-1024x538.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-07-30T19:35:55+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-07-30T19:35:57+00:00\",\"description\":\"Vendors claim 97 to 99% accuracy. Independent tests say 52 to 76%. We ranked 9 AI essay detectors on real benchmarks.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\\\/best-ai-detector-for-essays\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\\\/best-ai-detector-for-essays\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\\\/best-ai-detector-for-essays\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/GPTZero-Homepage.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/GPTZero-Homepage.jpg\",\"width\":1200,\"height\":630,\"caption\":\"GPTZero Homepage\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\\\/best-ai-detector-for-essays\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Best AI Detector for Essays: 9 Tools Tested Against Independent Data\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\\\/\",\"name\":\"AI Technology Blog | aiPDF\",\"description\":\"Your Hub for AI Tutoring and Learning\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"aiPDF\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"http:\\\/\\\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/05\\\/aipdf-logo.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"http:\\\/\\\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/05\\\/aipdf-logo.png\",\"width\":800,\"height\":800,\"caption\":\"aiPDF\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"}},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0fa2ce23669135fd25255c6a6b0efd1c\",\"name\":\"Rancea Bogdan\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/3a60335b06917a0916d71fda996a92fd0e1e1bf06d2fe3dab53d822ba4b288ed?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/3a60335b06917a0916d71fda996a92fd0e1e1bf06d2fe3dab53d822ba4b288ed?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/3a60335b06917a0916d71fda996a92fd0e1e1bf06d2fe3dab53d822ba4b288ed?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Rancea Bogdan\"},\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\\\/author\\\/bogdan\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Best AI Detector for Essays: 9 Tools Tested Against Independent Data - AI Tutor Blog","description":"Vendors claim 97 to 99% accuracy. Independent tests say 52 to 76%. We ranked 9 AI essay detectors on real benchmarks.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/best-ai-detector-for-essays\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Best AI Detector for Essays: 9 Tools Tested Against Independent Data - AI Tutor Blog","og_description":"Vendors claim 97 to 99% accuracy. Independent tests say 52 to 76%. We ranked 9 AI essay detectors on real benchmarks.","og_url":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/best-ai-detector-for-essays\/","og_site_name":"AI Tutor Blog","article_published_time":"2026-07-30T19:35:55+00:00","article_modified_time":"2026-07-30T19:35:57+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1200,"height":630,"url":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/GPTZero-Homepage.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Rancea Bogdan","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Rancea Bogdan","Est. reading time":"15 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/best-ai-detector-for-essays\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/best-ai-detector-for-essays\/"},"author":{"name":"Rancea Bogdan","@id":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/#\/schema\/person\/0fa2ce23669135fd25255c6a6b0efd1c"},"headline":"Best AI Detector for Essays: 9 Tools Tested Against Independent Data","datePublished":"2026-07-30T19:35:55+00:00","dateModified":"2026-07-30T19:35:57+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/best-ai-detector-for-essays\/"},"wordCount":2873,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/best-ai-detector-for-essays\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"http:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/GPTZero-Homepage-1024x538.jpg","articleSection":["AI Tools"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/best-ai-detector-for-essays\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/best-ai-detector-for-essays\/","url":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/best-ai-detector-for-essays\/","name":"Best AI Detector for Essays: 9 Tools Tested Against Independent Data - AI Tutor Blog","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/best-ai-detector-for-essays\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/best-ai-detector-for-essays\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"http:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/GPTZero-Homepage-1024x538.jpg","datePublished":"2026-07-30T19:35:55+00:00","dateModified":"2026-07-30T19:35:57+00:00","description":"Vendors claim 97 to 99% accuracy. Independent tests say 52 to 76%. We ranked 9 AI essay detectors on real benchmarks.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/best-ai-detector-for-essays\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/best-ai-detector-for-essays\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/best-ai-detector-for-essays\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/GPTZero-Homepage.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/GPTZero-Homepage.jpg","width":1200,"height":630,"caption":"GPTZero Homepage"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/best-ai-detector-for-essays\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Best AI Detector for Essays: 9 Tools Tested Against Independent Data"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/#website","url":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/","name":"AI Technology Blog | aiPDF","description":"Your Hub for AI Tutoring and Learning","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/#organization","name":"aiPDF","url":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"http:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/05\/aipdf-logo.png","contentUrl":"http:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/05\/aipdf-logo.png","width":800,"height":800,"caption":"aiPDF"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/#\/schema\/person\/0fa2ce23669135fd25255c6a6b0efd1c","name":"Rancea Bogdan","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/3a60335b06917a0916d71fda996a92fd0e1e1bf06d2fe3dab53d822ba4b288ed?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/3a60335b06917a0916d71fda996a92fd0e1e1bf06d2fe3dab53d822ba4b288ed?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/3a60335b06917a0916d71fda996a92fd0e1e1bf06d2fe3dab53d822ba4b288ed?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Rancea Bogdan"},"url":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/author\/bogdan\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1047","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1047"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1047\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1056,"href":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1047\/revisions\/1056"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1047"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1047"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.ai-tutor.ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1047"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}