
GPTZero
代替候補のひとつ
Check writing for AI-associated patterns and review sentence-level findings
Review likely AI text with highlighted passages and shareable reports
Winston AI detects text associated with major generative models and returns a human-versus-AI likelihood score with highlighted passages. It also provides shareable reports, a Chrome extension, and APIs, with text detection available across multiple languages including Simplified Chinese.
更新日
2026-10-26
対応プラットフォーム
Web / Chrome Extension / API
お試し
The site lets users begin with a free account and says no credit card is required; it also directs larger needs to sales, while exact plan limits were not exposed in this capture.
* 料金は参考情報です。最新の料金は公式サイトをご確認ください
See a likelihood estimate for human- or AI-generated writing, giving reviewers a signal to consider alongside other evidence.
Use color-coded passages to locate sections associated with AI patterns and focus follow-up review where it may be useful.
Generate a report that can be downloaded and shared with colleagues who need to see the document review findings.
Run checks in a browser workflow or connect the detection API to a product that needs integrated text review.
Inspect highlighted passages and likelihood scores as part of a broader review rather than treating a detector result as proof.
Document text checks with downloadable reports when reviewing drafts before they enter an editorial workflow.
Connect text detection through an API when authenticity checks need to appear inside an existing web application.
クイックスタート
Run a representative text sample and note the overall likelihood score before focusing on any individual passage.
Inspect highlighted passages, then download a report if colleagues need to review the same findings.
Use the Chrome extension to check text while reviewing pages in the browser.
実践のコツ
Core tip: Treat the likelihood score as a triage signal. Do compare highlighted passages with the document's purpose and writing history; don't use one percentage to accuse an author or rank unrelated texts. If a result matters, document the surrounding evidence and let a person make the final call.
No. It expresses the detector's assessment of text patterns, not a verified identity or complete writing history. Use it to decide what merits review, then consider drafts, sources, and the author's explanation.
Avoid treating scores as a universal ranking: topic, length, language, and writing style can differ between documents. Review each result in its own context and use consistent human review criteria.
Keep the report as one observation and invite the writer to share drafts, notes, or other process evidence. A disagreement cannot be settled by rescanning alone; follow the review policy for your school or publication.
このツールが合わない場合は、次の代替候補をご覧ください