Understanding AI Identifiers: Their Use and Limitations in Content Detection

Discover unique industry tools and calculators to transform your website into a backlink magnet.

The internet is flooded with lists claiming to reveal the telltale signs of AI-generated content. 

“AI identifiers,” they’re called. 

While these lists might seem helpful at first glance, they’re far from foolproof. In fact, relying solely on them to detect AI content can be dangerously misleading. 

Why? 

Because many of these so-called “AI identifiers” are words and phrases that have been staples of human writing long before ChatGPT burst onto the scene. 

Before we start flagging every article with a hint of “delve” or “meticulous” as AI-generated, we need a more nuanced approach. 

This post, with the help of insights from leaders from the content and digital business community, explores the limitations of current AI detection methods and asks the crucial question: How can we accurately identify AI-written text without falsely accusing human authors?

Read on!

Abhishek Guha Roy

As a co-founder of a tech startup, I’ve witnessed how AI has transformed the way we generate and engage with content.

Nonetheless, it’s intriguing to recognize that AI detectors can indeed assess text patterns to ascertain whether a human or an advanced AI model crafted a piece of writing.

Based on my experience, these detectors aim to recognize specific types of words and styles—such as high-frequency terms, sophisticated vocabulary, excessively formal tones, repetitive phrases, or intricate sentence structures. 

For example, terms like “delve”, “moreover”, “pivotal”, “tapestry”, and expressions like “dive into the details” or “it’s important to note” frequently appear in AI-generated content.

Why is this the case?

AI models like GPT-4 are trained on extensive amounts of text from various sources. This training enables them to detect and replicate patterns, but it also leads to the regular use of specific words and phrases. 

While this uniformity is an advantage, it simultaneously poses a drawback—it lacks the nuanced variety and creativity that human authors naturally contribute.

From my observations, AI detectors utilize these repetitive patterns to discern when content may not be wholly human-generated. 

To avoid detection, I’ve discovered that adapting a more informal, conversational tone and diversifying language choices proves most effective.

It revolves around injecting a bit of human personality and creativity into the writing—a talent AI has yet to acquire fully.

AI is an influential instrument, but grasping its subtleties can assist us in maximizing its potential while ensuring our content remains genuinely human when necessary.

Andre Oentoro

Common identifiers to see AI-generated content will be symbols.  

Some of them which always made me realize that a text is written by AI are the em dash “—”, brackets “[ ]”, and the use of bold texts. 

These are somehow neither amusing nor problematic to me, it just makes it easier to evaluate a writing. With those symbols present, I can recognize AI-generated content in an instant. 

Those symbols are always used mainly in providing examples and elaborations of information. It is also used to emphasize something, but rather than giving anything convincing, it just makes the text confusing and has no flow.

Ryan Gray

I think it’s inherently problematic once we reduce AI content identification into a list of phrases. Yes, AI content does abuse certain phrasings, but that’s because humans tend to use those phrases too. If we rely solely on these “identifiers,” false positives will be very hard to avoid.

Personally, I find it hard to explain what makes me think something is AI-generated, but you kind of feel it in your bones, especially if you write regularly or even just speak English as your first language. 

Something always feels off. 

AI always sounds to me like it learned all the correct ways to say things but doesn’t have a “flair” that humans would have, or at least those who have been speaking the English language since birth or at a proficient level.

One of the things that immediately flag a piece of content for me is when it seems to phrase things the way they should be, meaning it is grammatically correct in all the prescriptive ways. 

Humans can, of course, have perfect grammar, but they tend to play around with words and stretch the limits of what’s possible under the given set of rules. 

AI doesn’t do that, in my observation. 

Content generated by ChatGPT, for example, tends to phrase sentences in the “most correct” manner, if that makes any sense.

Eric Turney

Here at the office, the favorite identifier words are: “bespoke,” “vibrant,” and, of course, “furthermore.”

It’s gotten to the hilarious level that these words indicate poor performance in the office. For example, “Lunch at the deli was really bespoke today.” In other words, “Lunch was terrible”.

We continue to see these indicator words over and over again in the majority of AI tools that we even put a “banded list” of words for our editors to search for before posting.

Eric Turney
Sales & Marketing Director, The Monterey Company

Wes Wakefield

One amusing identifier often cited for AI-generated content is “overuse of the same descriptive phrases or structures.” While true in some cases, humans also fall into repetitive patterns, especially under tight deadlines.

What I find more problematic is the reliance on rigid criteria like “lack of personal anecdotes” to tag content as AI-made.

Not every human writer leans into storytelling, and not every AI output lacks creativity or nuance.

This rigid approach can lead to false positives, undermining trust in authentic human work.

Instead of solely relying on generic identifiers, focusing on the intent and utility of the content might be more productive.

Whether crafted by AI or humans, valuable content is defined by how well it resonates with readers and serves its purpose, not by the tool used to create it.

Casey Meraz

One of the more amusing and often problematic identifiers people mention is “stilted language.”

Many assume that AI-generated content lacks the natural flow and nuances found in human writing. While it’s true that some AI outputs may feel robotic, the technology is evolving quickly.

A practical tip when writing content to avoid seeming AI-generated is to inject subtle humor or cultural references appropriate to your audience, which AI may struggle to emulate with precision.

This approach not only makes your content feel more human but also engages readers on a relatable level.

It’s like giving your writing a personal touch that algorithms can’t quite replicate yet.

Jehann Biggs

One identifier I find both amusing and problematic is the claim that AI-generated content often lacks “emotion” or “human warmth.” 

While it’s true that poorly executed AI content can feel robotic, this blanket assumption overlooks how well AI can mimic conversational tones and adapt to stylistic nuances when guided by good prompts.

It’s ironic that some of the same people critiquing AI’s lack of personality may unknowingly engage with AI-crafted content daily.

Another is the overuse of generic phrases like “As an AI language model.” 

While they may reveal AI authorship, these phrases are usually added for clarity rather than being intrinsic to the AI itself. 

Ultimately, focusing too heavily on rigid “identifiers” risks stereotyping all AI outputs, ignoring how they can vary greatly in quality depending on their use.

Roman Hipp

One commonly listed identifier of AI-generated content that stands out is the claim that it often uses repetitive phrases or overly formal language. 

While this can be true in poorly fine-tuned systems, modern AI tools are becoming remarkably sophisticated, making such identifiers less reliable. 

Another amusing misconception is the assumption that any “too-perfect” grammar or structure indicates AI involvement. It dismisses the possibility of well-edited human content and risks overreliance on stereotypes about how AI operates.

The most problematic identifier, however, is the tendency to assume AI lacks creativity or emotional nuance. 

Advanced AI models can mimic human-like creativity convincingly, making this distinction increasingly blurry. 

Rather than relying on superficial markers, identifying AI-generated content should involve understanding its context and intent, as these factors are far more telling than stylistic quirks.

James Hacking

What I find amusing is how identifiers often assume AI-generated content is inherently uncreative. 

Labels like “overly polished” or “mechanical” feel ironic, as some of the most exceptional human writing is precisely crafted to near perfection. If anything, these identifiers highlight how high-quality content—whether from humans or AI—can blur the lines between the two.

On the other hand, terms like “unnatural phrasing” can be problematic. Many human writers, particularly in global contexts, use unique or unconventional expressions that are perfectly valid but might be unfairly flagged as AI. 

This focus on spotting AI feels like a modern witch hunt, diverting attention from what matters: whether the content resonates with and informs its audience effectively.

James Hacking
Founder & Chief Playmaker, Socially Powerful

Samuel Huang

AI-generated content “identifiers” like “too polished language” or “suspicious fluency” are laughable and flawed because they assume AI lacks creativity or human-like imperfections. This mindset underestimates AI’s sophistication and oversimplifies human writing.

What’s truly problematic is relying on vague clues like “overuse of certain phrases” or “generic tone” when many human writers are guilty of the same. For example, in digital marketing, content often follows templates—crafted by humans but indistinguishable from AI to the untrained eye.

The obsession with “identifiers” exposes a deeper irony: we’re chasing a binary in a world where AI and human creativity increasingly overlap.

As someone who works in Telegram advertising, I see firsthand how automated tools mimic human behavior convincingly.

Instead of hunting for markers, the focus should be on authenticity, relevance, and purpose—whether human- or AI-made. Chasing “clues” only distracts from asking the real question: does the content deliver value?

The BoostMyDomain team thanks these experts and leaders for taking the time to share their valuable insights on AI identifiers. 

BoostMyDomain invites you to share your insights and contribute to our authoritative publication. Reach a wider audience, build your credibility, and establish yourself as a thought leader in an industry that caters to every business with an online presence!

outreach@boostmydomain.com

Add a comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Prev Next