If your story got rejected for AI, this might help

[ShelbyDawn57]

The research concerns academic papers, but I’m thinking these concepts will relate to fiction.

 

[Bamagan]

I'm not sure how helpful the rejectees will find that article. The only advice they could take from it is 'learn to write better', or at least, write more conversationally. Who's got time for that?

 

[XerXesXu]

The research concerns academic papers, but I’m thinking these concepts will relate to fiction.

These criteria are based on the assumption that all humans are the same. Many humans lack empathy and the ability to connect with others; they, unfairly, will be classified as AI simply because they write like AI.

 

[AwkwardMD]

These instructions are for writing non-fiction. It is not what will get potential Lit authors past Lit's AI detector. Writing your own work is what will get you past Lit's AI detector.

 

[ShelbyDawn57]

These instructions are for writing non-fiction. It is not what will get potential Lit authors past Lit's AI detector. Writing your own work is what will get you past Lit's AI detector.

You're right, and I said that up front. But with a little inference, you can pick up that AI is simplistic, repetitive, and lacks flair. Do things to(paraphrasing) build a connection with the audience, be personal, intuitive, and add flair.

In short, if you keep getting tagged as AI, you probably need to review your style for ways to spiced things up a bit.
I would specifically suggest, varying your sentence and paragraph length, playing with dialog tag placement, break grammar rules here and there.(throw in, a, Walken, or a Shatner, comma, occasionally)

If your style is sacrosanct, the problem is you.

 

[AwkwardMD]

In short, if you keep getting tagged as AI, you probably need to review your style for ways to spiced things up a bit.
I would specifically suggest, varying your sentence and paragraph length, playing with dialog tag placement, break grammar rules here and there.(throw in, a, Walken, or a Shatner, comma, occasionally)

All due respect, I don’t think I've seen evidence of that happening here. Most (would we agree 2/3rds?), upon being told that Grammarly probably did it, say "ooooooh, lemme go undo what Grammarly did."

The other 1/3 insist that no such tools were used, and when it is suggested that they submit a document with tracked changes they quietly go away.

I don’t think this addresses either one of those two most common situations

 

[AwkwardMD]

Certainly the threads of the second type are a lot longer, and likely more memorable, but I think a few very loud rejectees are responsible for an outsized proportion of complaints.

 

[ElectricBlue]

All due respect, I don’t think I've seen evidence of that happening here. Most (would we agree 2/3rds?), upon being told that Grammarly probably did it, say "ooooooh, lemme go undo what Grammarly did."

At the end of first AI plague - about a year and half ago - I reckon you're right - most people were coming unstuck because they were slavishly following their Grammarly suggestions. Stop doing that, problem solved.

The other 1/3 insist that no such tools were used, and when it is suggested that they submit a document with tracked changes they quietly go away.

Certainly the threads of the second type are a lot longer, and likely more memorable, but I think a few very loud rejectees are responsible for an outsized proportion of complaints.

Remember, though, the chorus, "Oh, but you can't tell them to change their style, it's the detector that's faulty," when three years ago, before AI was a thing, we would all have been nodding, yep, that's good writers' advice...

 

[XerXesXu]

Do things to(paraphrasing) build a connection with the audience, be personal, intuitive, and add flair.

I've just asked Copilot to write a short story to doing these things. It's written a story about someone sitting in a cafe noticing what's going on around them. It sounds very derivative, but with a little enhanced prompt engineering - who knows?