It runs in your browser and names the patterns it finds, so the reading costs nothing and sends nothing. Free, before you submit.
Bamboo scores a document and hands back a percentage. We hand back the other half of the answer: the specific patterns behind a score, each one named, each one in the text where you can see it. A percentage you cannot inspect is a number to argue about. A list you can is a list to fix.
The sample, checked30 pts
This research delves into the realm of generative language models and their implications for modern pedagogy. Comprehensive data analysis reveals a myriad of patterns that underscore the transformative impact of these tools on instructional design. It's worth noting that the findings resonate with existing literature, suggesting a holistic shift in how educators approach curriculum development in the digital age.
Review recommended: 30 points, against a review band of 10. Every mark above is a passage the detector named in the sample. The tool below runs the same check on your text.
Your draft
This research delves into the realm of generative language models and their implications for modern pedagogy. Comprehensive data analysis reveals a myriad of patterns that underscore the transformative impact of these tools on instructional design. It's worth noting that the findings resonate with existing literature, suggesting a holistic shift in how educators approach curriculum development in the digital age.
59 / 1,000 words
After
A score is a verdict you cannot inspect
A percentage tells you a number. It does not tell you why, which is the only
form of feedback an author can act on. Our checker shows the marks: the
word, the shape, the sentence, the exact span. That is less impressive on a
share card and more useful at a deadline.
The list is public
Every pattern the checker matches is published, as part of the free kit, in
files that work inside the coding assistants people use to draft. If you
want to fix the tells by hand, you can, with the same list we score against.
Is this a detector like Bamboo?
It is a checker, which is the more honest word. It matches a published list of patterns and measures a handful of statistics, in your browser. It tells you what it found. It does not hand you a probability about who wrote the text, because no pattern list can, and the percent on a detector page is a mapping, not a measurement.
How is this different from pasting into Bamboo?
Two things. The reading is free, and it runs where your paper is, so there is no question of what a third service keeps. And the output is the finding, not a verdict, which means you can act on it without a subscription.
The reading is clean. Can I submit?
A clean reading means the named patterns are absent from this text. It is not a certificate of authorship, and we would be sloppy to sell it as one. Cite your sources, do the thinking, and submit the work.
Say the thing you meant. Just not the way a model would say it.
Paste a draft, see every tell named, and take the rewrite. No card to start.