Story returned citing AI and instructing that I find an editor to review

[krystalg]

Hello everyone;

I recently submitted a story for publication that was returned asking me if it was AI-generated and instructing me to resubmit after I had a volunteer editor take a look at it. I did run it through Grammarly to check for spelling errors—as I often invert letters when typing and tend to miss them, occasionally, when I self-edit—but the writing is 100% mine. How do I proceed?
Thank you for your time and advice
K

 

[Bamagan]

Hello everyone;

I recently submitted a story for publication that was returned asking me if it was AI-generated and instructing me to resubmit after I had a volunteer editor take a look at it. I did run it through Grammarly to check for spelling errors—as I often invert letters when typing and tend to miss them, occasionally, when I self-edit—but the writing is 100% mine. How do I proceed?
Thank you for your time and advice
K

There are a lot of threads in the Author's Hangout on this topic, although they tend to get very repetitive.

The main thing you should do is resubmit with a note to the editor saying you didn't use AI, and possibly a brief description of your editing process. You might want to verify that your editing software is not 'autocorrecting' your sentences and words more than it needs to. Many such programs now include AI 'assistants' that are somewhat overzealous, so it might be taking liberties with your text that could potentially trigger whatever system Lit uses to try detecting machine-generated work.

If you get rejected a second time for AI, you might consider contacting Laurel here in the forums via direct message and explaining the situation, in case your stuff is getting screened out automatically, even with the note to the editor. She likely won't respond, but she may review the matter.

It is probably not worth the time and effort to use free AI detectors. If we knew what Lit was using it might be worthwhile to test against that one (or those ones). But they likely won't reveal that, because it would also make it much easier to trick the system.

Good luck!

 

[Nightscream89]

Grammarly uses A.I. to adjust your sentences.
I've seen a lot of people post here that they are flagged for A.I. use when using grammarly.

So I think Grammarly is the problem, although I don't know for sure.

Personally I write in google documents since it has a spelling and grammar check that works fine for me personally. You do have to adjust a bit more yourself than with grammarly, but none of my stories was ever flagged as A.I.

(I also like the fact that google docs saves the work in real time online, so accessable anywhere and it's always saved.)

 

[ElectricBlue]

Grammarly uses A.I. to adjust your sentences.
I've seen a lot of people post here that they are flagged for A.I. use when using grammarly.

So I think Grammarly is the problem, although I don't know for sure.

It's a common issue when folk report AI rejections, yes. Generally speaking, accepting Grammarly suggestions in fiction results in a very bland, dull style which tends to trip AI detectors.

 

[Todger65]

Grammarly is generally fine as long as you ignore most of it suggested sentence re-writes. Just mainly use it for spell and grammar checks, but again don’t blindly accept all its suggestions. It can never make its mind up whether it’s or its is correct. It always suggests to opposite to the one typed.

 

[FidelityBoss]

Hello everyone;

I recently submitted a story for publication that was returned asking me if it was AI-generated and instructing me to resubmit after I had a volunteer editor take a look at it. I did run it through Grammarly to check for spelling errors—as I often invert letters when typing and tend to miss them, occasionally, when I self-edit—but the writing is 100% mine. How do I proceed?
Thank you for your time and advice
K

It sounds like the publication might be overly cautious about AI-generated content. Since you’ve already clarified it’s your original work, I’d suggest reaching out to them directly and explaining your process (including Grammarly use). If they still insist on a volunteer editor, maybe ask if they can recommend one or connect you with someone. Alternatively, you could have a trusted writer friend or beta reader review it and vouch for its authenticity.

 

[krystalg]

Thanks, everyone.
I only use Grammarly as a spell-checker, because I tend to invert letters when I type and sometimes miss that when I self-edit—as we all tend to see what we intended rather than what we actually wrote when we edit ourselves. Honestly, the "grammar-correcting" and "auto rewrite" suggestions are, I feel, quite substandard, so I habitually ignore them.

Having reached out to multiple volunteer editors and receiving no replies, I've followed everyone's advice and resubmitted, highlighting exactly how and why I've used Grammarly.

I appreciate the help.

 

[Comentarista82]

I can look it over if you can get it to me, as I'm free.

add: you'll have to DM me or activate that feature, since it appears you have it off.

 

[krystalg]

I can look it over if you can get it to me, as I'm free.

add: you'll have to DM me or activate that feature, since it appears you have it off.

Thank you so much, Comentarista82, and thank you for the heads-up about the DMs. I sent it along to you, and I appreciate it very, very much.
K

 

[Comentarista82]

Thank you so much, Comentarista82, and thank you for the heads-up about the DMs. I sent it along to you, and I appreciate it very, very much.
K

Got it. Just check DM for one more thing and I'll start after that reply.

 

[krystalg]

Thank you, Comentarista82.