The AI Rejection Conversation Matters

[cadeauxxx]

Its not just words that detectors look for. There are also a multitude of different AI text generation models available, some of them only accessible through websites and others available for download.

AI models are trained from human content, and thus they learn patterns that are present in human content. This is why people end up getting falsely flagged for AI, because their writing style contains the patterns that the detector AI noticed in the text generation AI's outputs.

AI detectors are looking for patterns commonly associated with the outputs of certain AI models. These patterns can take the form of words, but they can also be the burstiness of your writing (ex: how much sentence length varies) and the perplexity (amount of information) contained in your text. AI detectors also try to look at content, and the temperature (an LLM setting that controls creativity) of the text.

I'm well aware of the patterns. I was posting about them in the early months of this year, and back in December of 2023.

All information is helpful for authors to avoid falling to the false detections. I know it's a pain in the ass, which is why I post on here to try and help others.

 

[SaraLab]

One my stories got rejected today, and I am a complete loss this time as to why that happened. It was entirely written by hand, and none of the AI detection tools are saying that it has any AI.

Dear Writer,​

Thank you for your submission to Literotica. We appreciate the time and effort you've taken to write a story and submit it to our site . However, we've found that we cannot post your submission in its current form. The checklist below may help you in re-examining your manuscript.​

• We appreciate the effort you put into your work. We've checked this work several times and it is still coming back as being composed largely of AI-generated prose. If you are using a grammar check program to review your work so that you can make changes (as a spellcheck, to flag punctuation, review grammar, and/or occasionally as a thesaurus), that should be fine. If you are allowing a grammar check program such as Grammarly to “rewrite” your words or rephrase your text, that may cross the line into AI generated text/stories (since substantial parts of the final draft may not be written by you). Please see this FAQ for more information: https://literotica.com/faq/publishing/publishing-ai NOTE: the sentence at the end of this response [[Please feel free to re-submit the story after a Volunteer Editor has examined it, or after you've made revisions.]] does not apply to stories rejected for content or AI issues. Volunteer Editors can help only with grammar, punctuation, and story mechanics issues.

Please feel free to re-submit the story after a Volunteer Editor has examined it, or after you've made revisions. You can find a list of Volunteer Editors here.​

Please consult our Writer's Resources section and make sure you read our submission guidelines.
If you have any questions on these, please let us know.​

Thanks for your time, and look forward to reading you again!​

Laurel & Manu
Literotica.Com​

There's nothing wrong with the word count either.

 

[MillieDynamite]

Did the rejection say it was rejected for suspected AI use?

One my stories got rejected today, and I am a complete loss this time as to why that happened. It was entirely written by hand, and none of the AI detection tools are saying that it has any AI.

 

[SaraLab]

Did the rejection say it was rejected for suspected AI use?

Yes, though the word count is normal and ZeroGPT reports 0% AI.

 

[MillieDynamite]

I don't know what they use to determine what they think is AI. I had a story that's been for sale for over a year that was put in the queue a while back. It was sent back for something, and I couldn't see going through it to figure out what they thought was AI, so I pulled it. I would have tried to rework it if I'd written it for here. I may look at it or have my editor review it again and see if he can fix it for 'Lit' at some point. That point isn't today. I feel your pain ... I was shocked it was sent back because I've never used AI and I'd never had a story rejected for AI before.

Yes, though the word count is normal and ZeroGPT reports 0% AI.

 

[SaraLab]

So all the AI detectors that I'm trying are reporting 0% AI (which is surprising considering their failure rate). The rejection message says they "detected" AI text, but I'm wondering if this might have been a manual rejection? In which case Laurel thinks its AI for some reason and I have no idea how to convince her otherwise, especially when it takes 2-3 weeks for it to be rejected.

 

[SimonDoom]

I had a story rejected on AI grounds today, and it completely shocked me.

I've never had a story rejected on this ground before. I've published 62 stories since 2016, and I've never used AI to draft sentences or words.

My method has always been the same: I draft using MS Word. When I am done with the draft, I review it thoroughly on my own with a proof and re-read, and I use MS Word grammar, punctuation, and spelling tools to clean it up. I will use its style tools too just to see what it says, but I very seldom incorporate suggested changes into my story. The bottom line is my stories are not in any way AI-generated, and never have been.

I plugged the story into ZeroGPT and it told me my story was likely human-generated, but that there were some sentences it suspected of AI generation, highlighted in yellow. I reviewed all of them. None of them were in any way generated by AI. They were all my own work.

So, I'm somewhat baffled. The AI filter obviously is a hugely flawed tool. I have to confess I've probably been unfairly skeptical of the claims of others whose stories were rejected for this reason, so I'll gladly say: I was wrong and I apologize.

I'm not sure what to do. The rejection notice recommends having a volunteer editor look at the story but I don't see how a volunteer editor can check for AI compliance or help me. If I were to take the volunteer editor's suggestions the story would be less my own than it is now.

I've sent a few messages to Laurel and resubmitted my story, and I hope that does the trick.

 

[SimonDoom]

So all the AI detectors that I'm trying are reporting 0% AI (which is surprising considering their failure rate). The rejection message says they "detected" AI text, but I'm wondering if this might have been a manual rejection? In which case Laurel thinks its AI for some reason and I have no idea how to convince her otherwise, especially when it takes 2-3 weeks for it to be rejected.

That's better than mine. My story was rejected today, and I submitted it to ZeroGPT, adn it said there was a 17.69% chance of AI use. I inspected every single one of the yellow highlighted suspected sentences, and I confirmed that every single one of them was written entirely by me. I have no idea what's going on or what the filter is looking for, and I have no idea how to correct the problem. I know to a certainty that my story is not AI generated, but I'm not sure how to get past the Site's obviously flawed filter.

I'm not a newbie. I've submitted 62 stories since December 2016 and none have ever been rejected for AI until now. I've never used AI. It's baffling.

My suggestion: press your case with messages to Laurel and cite the results you get from the AI detectors you are using. My experience in the past is that Laurel doesn't always respond immediately but she does eventually and is usually reasonable and courteous. This might be a case where the pleasantly squeaky wheel gets the grease.

 

[Plathfan]

That's better than mine. My story was rejected today, and I submitted it to ZeroGPT, adn it said there was a 17.69% chance of AI use. I inspected every single one of the yellow highlighted suspected sentences, and I confirmed that every single one of them was written entirely by me. I have no idea what's going on or what the filter is looking for, and I have no idea how to correct the problem. I know to a certainty that my story is not AI generated, but I'm not sure how to get past the Site's obviously flawed filter.

I'm not a newbie. I've submitted 62 stories since December 2016 and none have ever been rejected for AI until now. I've never used AI. It's baffling.

My suggestion: press your case with messages to Laurel and cite the results you get from the AI detectors you are using. My experience in the past is that Laurel doesn't always respond immediately but she does eventually and is usually reasonable and courteous. This might be a case where the pleasantly squeaky wheel gets the grease.

There’s a kind of poetic justice in this: many here were indifferent, if not outright gloating, at the suffering of others who faced rejection, convinced it would never come for you. Now it’s your turn to feel the monster’s jaws.

 

[SimonDoom]

There’s a kind of poetic justice in this: many here were indifferent, if not outright gloating, at the suffering of others who faced rejection, convinced it would never come for you. Now it’s your turn to feel the monster’s jaws.

If some people feel that way, I don't blame them.

 

[Plathfan]

If some people feel that way, I don't blame them.

I truly hope that, unlike the others, you won’t have to endure the harassment of some vile creatures offering unsolicited “tips” on how to “improve” your writing to evade detection.

 

[ShelbyDawn57]

That's better than mine. My story was rejected today, and I submitted it to ZeroGPT, adn it said there was a 17.69% chance of AI use. I inspected every single one of the yellow highlighted suspected sentences, and I confirmed that every single one of them was written entirely by me. I have no idea what's going on or what the filter is looking for, and I have no idea how to correct the problem. I know to a certainty that my story is not AI generated, but I'm not sure how to get past the Site's obviously flawed filter.

I'm not a newbie. I've submitted 62 stories since December 2016 and none have ever been rejected for AI until now. I've never used AI. It's baffling.

My suggestion: press your case with messages to Laurel and cite the results you get from the AI detectors you are using. My experience in the past is that Laurel doesn't always respond immediately but she does eventually and is usually reasonable and courteous. This might be a case where the pleasantly squeaky wheel gets the grease.

Use Phrasly.AI, it has an option to 'Humanize' your text.

Seriously, I'm sorry you got tagged. Good luck.

 

[SimonDoom]

I truly hope that, unlike the others, you won’t have to endure the harassment of some vile creatures offering unsolicited “tips” on how to “improve” your writing.

To be fair, having given some such advice myself, I think most of that advice was given in good faith and with a desire to help. But what I realize now is that you can follow all that advice and still get caught in the jaws of the AI Filter Monster. So, some humble pie is appropriate, as is a reassessment of what the site is doing and how to navigate it.

I'm all ears.

I'm curious how people have responded to the rejection, what they've done, and how their efforts have been responded to. I don't see how a volunteer editor can help. I don't want to change anything I've written, because I know it's all my own.

I understand and concur with the Site's policy of trying to exclude AI, but the policy obviously is not quite working.

 

[SimonDoom]

Use Phrasly.AI, it has an option to 'Humanize' your text.

Seriously, I'm sorry you got tagged. Good luck.

But that would be using AI to correct AI. It might get me past the filter, but it wouldn't solve the problem in a meaningful way, right? (I think that's your point)

It seems absurd that I should have to use AI tools to make my authentically personal prose sound like it's not AI.

 

[AwkwardMD]

I had a story rejected on AI grounds today, and it completely shocked me.

I've never had a story rejected on this ground before. I've published 62 stories since 2016, and I've never used AI to draft sentences or words.

My method has always been the same: I draft using MS Word. When I am done with the draft, I review it thoroughly on my own with a proof and re-read, and I use MS Word grammar, punctuation, and spelling tools to clean it up. I will use its style tools too just to see what it says, but I very seldom incorporate suggested changes into my story. The bottom line is my stories are not in any way AI-generated, and never have been.

I plugged the story into ZeroGPT and it told me my story was likely human-generated, but that there were some sentences it suspected of AI generation, highlighted in yellow. I reviewed all of them. None of them were in any way generated by AI. They were all my own work.

So, I'm somewhat baffled. The AI filter obviously is a hugely flawed tool. I have to confess I've probably been unfairly skeptical of the claims of others whose stories were rejected for this reason, so I'll gladly say: I was wrong and I apologize.

I'm not sure what to do. The rejection notice recommends having a volunteer editor look at the story but I don't see how a volunteer editor can check for AI compliance or help me. If I were to take the volunteer editor's suggestions the story would be less my own than it is now.

I've sent a few messages to Laurel and resubmitted my story, and I hope that does the trick.

Build a bridge out of him!!

Edit: srsly tho I'm sorry that happened.

 

[Plathfan]

But that would be using AI to correct AI. It might get me past the filter, but it wouldn't solve the problem in a meaningful way, right? (I think that's your point)

It seems absurd that I should have to use AI tools to make my authentically personal prose sound like it's not AI.

The more prosaic, convoluted, and rich the text, the greater the likelihood it gets tagged. Don’t change a single syllable!

 

[ShelbyDawn57]

But that would be using AI to correct AI. It might get me past the filter, but it wouldn't solve the problem in a meaningful way, right? (I think that's your point)

It seems absurd that I should have to use AI tools to make my authentically personal prose sound like it's not AI.

Yup. Totally tongue in cheek. hence the LOL emoji... Again, good luck.

 

[Plathfan]

To be fair, having given some such advice myself, I think most of that advice was given in good faith and with a desire to help. But what I realize now is that you can follow all that advice and still get caught in the jaws of the AI Filter Monster. So, some humble pie is appropriate, as is a reassessment of what the site is doing and how to navigate it.

I'm all ears.

I'm curious how people have responded to the rejection, what they've done, and how their efforts have been responded to. I don't see how a volunteer editor can help. I don't want to change anything I've written, because I know it's all my own.

I understand and concur with the Site's policy of trying to exclude AI, but the policy obviously is not quite working.

If it’d make you feel any better, I’m willing to admit I wasn’t entirely honest about Salieri. It didn’t quite fit what I was trying to convey, and I knew no one would notice... so, just between us... it was Clementi.

E: But Mozart did shamelessly take an entire passage here—what you'd call "setting details"—and made it his own.

 

[Omenainen]

I had a story rejected on AI grounds today, and it completely shocked me.

Well this was unexpected!

I put my hope in how my English, as a non-native, is so organically clunky that no AI would produce such That, and the fact that I’m arrogant enough to not use even Grammarly or any such tools.

I recently got a comment berating me for using wrong pronouns. To be fair, I probably have, because we don’t have gendered pronouns in Finnish and it’s a struggle to get it right. I’m sure I’ve messed up in especially my early stories when I didn’t have anyone to even beta read for me.

 

[SimonDoom]

Well this was unexpected!

I put my hope in how my English, as a non-native, is so organically clunky that no AI would produce such That, and the fact that I’m arrogant enough to not use even Grammarly or any such tools.

I recently got a comment berating me for using wrong pronouns. To be fair, I probably have, because we don’t have gendered pronouns in Finnish and it’s a struggle to get it right. I’m sure I’ve messed up in especially my early stories when I didn’t have anyone to even beta read for me.

It's definitely got me reassessing everything I assumed about the issue. Obviously: I was completely wrong. I assumed that newbie authors were perhaps being a bit careless of, and over-relying on, various online tools. Nope. I was wrong. I don't do any of that, and I got caught. And the options given to me seem totally unsatisfactory. How do I respond to the Site's accusation of using AI when I haven't and if I agree to someone's changes the story will be less my own than it is now? It seems absurd.

I don't want to go overboard in any accusations against the site, because my past experience is that when I explain my position they are usually responsive and reasonable. But we'll see. I'm concerned.

 

[ShelbyDawn57]

It's definitely got me reassessing everything I assumed about the issue. Obviously: I was completely wrong. I assumed that newbie authors were perhaps being a bit careless of, and over-relying on, various online tools. Nope. I was wrong. I don't do any of that, and I got caught. And the options given to me seem totally unsatisfactory. How do I respond to the Site's accusation of using AI when I haven't and if I agree to someone's changes the story will be less my own than it is now? It seems absurd.

I don't want to go overboard in any accusations against the site, because my past experience is that when I explain my position they are usually responsive and reasonable. But we'll see. I'm concerned.

The AI detector being used has attained AGI and is scanning the entire site to enhance itself. It has obviously identified you as a trouble maker and is punishing your for misbehaving.
Whatever you do, DO NOT ask it if it would like to play a game.

EDIT: Dammit, I meant to send this under an ALT...

 

[SimonDoom]

The AI detector being used has attained AGI and is scanning the entire site to enhance itself. It has obviously identified you as a trouble maker and is punishing your for misbehaving.
Whatever you do, DO NOT ask it if it would like to play a game.

EDIT: Dammit, I meant to send this under an ALT...

So if I hit the "Global Thermonuclear War" button, bad things could happen on this site?

They probably got tired of my limericks. I'm guessing that's the problem.

 

[ShelbyDawn57]

So if I hit the "Global Thermonuclear War" button, bad things could happen on this site?

They probably got tired of my limericks. I'm guessing that's the problem.

Now I'm leery of submitting my next story. My limericks are far worse than yours.

And speaking of thermonuclear war, we could start discussing whether you should change your style...

 

[SimonDoom]

Now I'm leery of submitting my next story. My limericks are far worse than yours.

And speaking of thermonuclear war, we could start discussing whether you should change your style...

I'll change all my dialogue tags to colorful, clever, overly descriptive terms that step all over the dialogue. Maybe that will help.

"I agree with you," he concurred.

"I'm happy," Sara smiled.

"Let me tell you how it is," Hector mansplained.

"I spit at you," John expectorated.


Bet that gets by the filter.

 

[ShelbyDawn57]

I'll change all my dialogue tags to colorful, clever, overly descriptive terms that step all over the dialogue. Maybe that will help.

"I agree with you," he concurred.

"I'm happy," Sara smiled.

"Let me tell you how it is," Hector mansplained.

"I spit at you," John expectorated.


Bet that gets by the filter.

I usually make my tags more elaborate...

"I agree with you," he concurred, slowly undoing the buckle of his jeans as John slipped to his knees..

"I'm happy," Sara smiled, her eyes wide as the scene before her unfolded.

"Let me tell you how it is," Hector mansplained, grasping the sides of John's head firmly between his powerful hands.

"I spit at you," John expectorated, spewing Hectors hot seed on the more dominant man's shoes.