How do you tell if you are reading AI-generated content?
Here is an extensive list of different AI tells:
Repetitive or “formulaic” phrasing
AI text often uses repeated sentence patterns or specific turns of phrase in a way that feels mechanical.
Overuse of certain “filler” words
You might notice recurring crutch words or phrases (e.g., “In conclusion,” “Additionally,” “Moreover”) in many paragraphs.
Unnatural fluency or consistency
AI text can read a little too clean: perfect grammar, uniform style, or neat transitions everywhere even where a human might slip or vary the tone.
Lack of genuine personal perspective
AI-generated text often avoids authentic anecdotes or experiences. Any “personal story” might be so generic it feels canned or lacks specific details.
Overly formal or neutral tone
Unless specifically prompted otherwise, AI often defaults to a polite, even, or academic tone that might not match the subject’s usual style.
Predictable structure
Throughout the piece, paragraphs can follow a near-identical pattern (intro sentence → two to three supporting sentences → concluding sentence).
Inconsistent depth or detail
AI sometimes over-explains simple points while glossing over genuinely complex ones. This mismatch can feel jarring or “off.”
Hallucinated references or citations
If asked for sources, AI may cite nonexistent articles, authors, or data—realistic-looking but incorrect references are a giveaway.
Glitches in logic or “self-contradiction”
The text might subtly contradict itself or misunderstand its earlier statements.
Generic or vague examples
Instead of giving specific illustrations, the text might rely on sweeping generalities—e.g., “some people find it challenging, while others do not.”
Sudden changes in style or vocabulary
The writing may jump from a straightforward explanation to oddly advanced or archaic wording without a clear reason.
Rambling completeness
AI can try to cover every aspect of a topic even when it’s not requested, leading to content that seems longer than necessary and lacking focus.
Slightly “off” idioms or expressions
AI might deploy phrases that sound close to common idioms but are phrased in ways native speakers wouldn’t use (e.g., “hit two birds with a single stone”).
Over-explanation of well-known facts
The text might meticulously break down basic concepts readers would likely already know, in a somewhat patronizing style.
Unnatural positivity or politeness
Many AI models default to a friendly, helpful stance, even when discussing topics that typically evoke stronger emotions or biases.
Repetitive transitional phrases
The text may rely heavily on the same connectors, “Similarly,” “On the other hand,” “Furthermore,” in nearly every paragraph.
Misuse or confusion of technical jargon
AI might introduce specialized terms correctly at first, but then incorrectly define or use them later in the text.
Robotic summarizing at the end
A concluding paragraph that almost mechanically recaps every point in the exact same order sounds like a bullet list just converted into sentences.
Very few first-person pronouns (or overuse of them)
Because AI can vary in how it’s prompted, some outputs avoid “I” altogether or might pepper it in to feign a personal voice but do so awkwardly.
“AI disclaimers” or phrasing
Some generated texts might include lines like “I am not a lawyer, but…” or “As an AI model…” (particularly if you see the text unedited).
Punctuation Patterns as an AI Tell
Punctuation can reveal subtle clues about whether a text is AI-generated, as AI models often follow predictable or overly consistent rules while humans tend to be more idiosyncratic. Here’s a deeper look:
Overuse of specific punctuation marks
Em dashes (—): AI often favors em dashes for asides, using them consistently without spaces (e.g., “The project—despite delays—succeeded”). Humans might mix in hyphens or parentheses or place spaces inconsistently.
Commas: AI can lean on commas heavily, especially in complex sentences, sometimes placing them where a human might omit them for flow (e.g., “The team worked tirelessly to meet deadlines” vs “The team worked tirelessly to meet deadlines”).
Semicolons (;): Some AI models overuse semicolons to connect clauses, even in casual writing, where humans might just use periods or conjunctions.
Rigid adherence to style guides
AI often follows strict punctuation rules, like always using or always avoiding the Oxford comma, whereas humans may be inconsistent depending on context or personal habit.
Unnatural dash usage
AI tends to prefer en (–) or em (—) dashes over the simpler hyphen (-), even in compound adjectives where a single hyphen is more common (e.g., “well-known”). It rarely mimics casual quirks like double hyphens (–).
Perfect quotation and parentheses handling
AI typically places punctuation inside quotes and balances parentheses flawlessly. Humans, especially in casual writing, may misplace commas or forget to close a parenthesis.
Consistent apostrophe and contraction use
AI rarely drops apostrophes (it’s vs. its) or uses informal omissions like “gonna” or “ain’t” unless specifically prompted. Humans might slip up or choose informal forms for tone.
Lack of intentional punctuation for effect
Humans often use multiple exclamation marks (!!!), ellipses (…), or fragments for drama. AI typically sticks to standard usage unless specifically told to emulate a particular style.
Uniform colon and bullet list formatting
AI tends to introduce lists with a perfect colon and keep bullet formatting consistent. Humans may end bullet points inconsistently or mix punctuation styles.
Avoidance of regional punctuation quirks
Unless prompted otherwise, AI usually defaults to American punctuation (e.g., double quotes “”), whereas humans might mix British, French, or other styles.
Lack of errors or typos
AI rarely makes accidental punctuation errors—its commas, periods, and dashes often follow grammatical rules flawlessly. Genuine typos are more likely to appear in human writing.
Predictable cadence through punctuation
AI’s punctuation often creates a neat, mechanical rhythm, with short, evenly spaced sentences. Humans may have longer run-ons or abrupt fragments reflecting thought flow or mood.
Why this matters: AI’s training usually optimizes for clarity and correctness, leading to punctuation patterns that can be too consistent or “perfect.” Meanwhile, humans punctuate with personal quirks or occasional mistakes. That said, advanced models can fake human “messiness,” so punctuation alone isn’t always definitive, but combined with the other tells, it’s a strong clue.
