| aidemia--modules-aicheck_request | Briefly analyze the probability that the provided text have been generated by AI - provide a brief 1-paragraph conclusion. |
| Paste a text for analysis | In conclusion, Martin Luther King Jr was a significant individual in the pursuit of improved African American civil rights due to the advancements that he made such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which was the result of his ‘I have a dream’ speech at the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom, among the many other significant things he achieved for the civil rights of African Americans. However, claiming that he was the most significant individual can reduce the significance of other individuals’ contributions, as well as the contributions of those who aided King to accomplish what he did. King was one individual among many, whether they be a President like Roosevelt passing the Fair Employment Practice Committee, or one of the 40,000 individuals who participated in the Montgomery Bus Boycott. Each person’s actions impacted the progression of civil rights, and the weight of their impact should not influence their recognition. |
| Calculate probability percentage | |
| Determine AI provider used | |
| Detailed report | |
| Any other preferences |
The provided text explores the contributions of Martin Luther King Jr. to the civil rights movement and emphasizes the collaborative nature of social progress. Several indicators could be considered when determining whether this text was generated by AI. Firstly, the structure and coherence of the argument suggest a reasoned human perspective. The text uses a clear progression of ideas and notably acknowledges the contributions of others, which is characteristic of thoughtful human writing. Furthermore, the nuanced view on the importance of collective efforts in social change reflects a depth of understanding that AI might struggle to fully capture, especially in a historical context. However, the overall formal tone and polished language could also align with AI-generated writing, particularly if it was trained on a substantial volume of similar historical analysis.
In conclusion, while there are elements in the text that could suggest the involvement of AI—such as its sophistication and structure—the depth of insight and historical awareness present more strongly indicate this text has likely been written by a human. Thus, the probability that this text was generated by AI seems relatively low, leaning towards it being a product of thoughtful, human authorship.