AI Flagged Your Writing? Build Process Evidence, Not a Detector Verdict
A detector score cannot establish authorship. If your writing has been flagged, preserve the record of how it developed and follow the review procedure that applies to you.
If you are already facing an accusation, do not buy another detector report as a defense. The free steps below are more relevant than another score.
Preview my documentWhat a checker-view preview can—and cannot—do
Use a preview before a future submission to find risk signals, never as an authorship ruling.
It can surface
Passages in the analyzed excerpt that resemble patterns a detection method reacts to.
It can support
A preview, meaning-focused revision, and recheck loop for a document that has not yet been submitted.
It cannot decide
Who wrote the document, whether a policy was violated, or how a school, employer, or client will rule.
Free preview: we analyze up to the first 2,000 characters
The free preview analyzes up to the first 2,000 characters. Longer text remains available if you continue after signing in.
We keep your document so you can find it again, and you can delete it whenever you want. We do not sell it. Manage or delete
What actually helps after a flag
1. Version history
Preserve the original time-stamped history and export or share it using the procedure your institution or recipient accepts. Avoid rewriting the history after the dispute begins.
2. Drafts
Gather outlines, partial drafts, tracked changes, feedback, and earlier files that show the work developing over time.
3. Process artifacts
Organize notes, source records, citation checks, assignment prompts, and a short factual timeline of your writing process.
Prepare for a fair review conversation
- Read the exact course, workplace, or client policy before responding.
- Ask which procedure applies and what forms of evidence the reviewer accepts.
- Keep original files intact; work from copies when organizing material.
- Be ready to explain the argument, sources, choices, and revision process in your own words.
- Separate a detector result from the decision: the relevant person or institution applies its own policy.
- Do not submit private or identifying material to another service without checking its storage and sharing terms.
Why process evidence comes first
Reviewed 2026-08-27Harvard Bok Center
Its faculty guidance lists document revision history and educational-system timestamps as useful supporting evidence, while calling AI checkers unreliable.
Scope: Guidance for Harvard faculty; your own institution or recipient controls its process.
Turnitin Guides
Turnitin says its model may misidentify text and should not be the sole basis for adverse action against a student.
Scope: Turnitin product guidance, not a universal rule for every institution or detector.
USC Office of Academic Integrity
Its guidance says detector output is insufficient to determine responsibility without contextual analysis or supporting elements.
Scope: USC guidance for its academic-integrity process; other policies may differ.
Continue with reviewed context
Resume checker-view preview
Review a resume before applying without treating the result as an ATS verdict.
Why reports do not establish authorship
Learn the gap between a statistical text signal and an authorship claim.
OmniDetect benchmark
Review measured scope, limitations, and validation status before interpreting a result.
Preview the next document before submission
The planned $9.99 one-time pilot is only for a new, not-yet-submitted document that returns confident-AI Red in OmniDetect. It is not a paid defense service for an existing accusation.
- One document, up to 10,000 characters
- Observed-passage review and a meaning-focused revision plan
- Rechecks in OmniDetect for up to 7 days
- No authorship ruling and no promise about another checker or reviewer
Pilot checkout is not live. Current post-flag guidance on this page remains free.