Draft talk:Justice Technology

After checking it in dozens of AI detector tools I found out that this is an AI written article, not actually article but a research. This may be a ChatGPT research or perplexity ai research but its one of them, I asked ChatGPT to check this through reverse engineering and it claimed it is AI written. Further, check here, [https://www.scribbr.com/ai-detector/] or here [https://quillbot.com/ai-content-detector]. Wh67890 (talk) 23:37, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

:this is what GPT said-

:Yes, the passage does appear to be AI-written or at least heavily influenced by AI-style writing, based on several telltale signs:

: ----

:Indicators of AI-Generated Text

:# Overly formal and polished tone

:#* Phrases like “systematic application,” “technological infrastructure,” “methodological frameworks,” are characteristic of AI or academic generator tools. [a typical thing to note because when we write article, we cannot frame such words at first as no actual source uses such type of language].

:#* Real human writing—unless highly edited—usually varies more in tone and rhythm. [exactly what i said].

:# Balanced, neutral phrasing of both pros and cons

:#* The paragraph includes pros ("improve efficiency, accessibility...") and cons ("may deepen existing inequalities...") in a neat structure — a typical pattern in AI-generated explanatory text.

:# Dense sentence structure

:#* Every sentence is information-rich and compound-complex. While humans do write like this, the consistency of this density is more common in AI-generated content.

: ----

:Verdict

:Most likely AI-generated or AI-edited.

:The language, structure, and use of pseudo-citations are classic signs. If a human wrote this, they likely used an AI tool to assist or revise it. Wh67890 (talk) 23:45, 3 June 2025 (UTC)