{"id":9014,"date":"2024-12-03T05:25:59","date_gmt":"2024-12-03T05:25:59","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/ampifire.com\/blog\/?p=9014"},"modified":"2025-02-07T14:47:31","modified_gmt":"2025-02-07T14:47:31","slug":"deepl-vs-surferseo-review","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ampifire.com\/blog\/deepl-vs-surferseo-review\/","title":{"rendered":"DeepL vs SurferSEO: Best AI Humanizers Compared | Do They Really Work?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Article at-a-glance<\/strong>

– Humanizers primarily work by making content worse by adding minor mistakes.<\/strong>

– SurferSEO reduces AI detection significantly<\/strong>: 16% AI probability on GPTZero, 56% on ZeroGPT (compared to 66% and 84% for DeepL);

– DeepL has higher AI detection scores<\/strong>: 66% on GPTZero and 84% on ZeroGPT, but produces cleaner, more professional writing than SurferSEO;

– Correcting SurferSEO copy increases AI scores<\/strong>: 52% on GPTZero and 69% on ZeroGPT after fixing language issues;

– ABBA AI-ism removal from DeepL lowers GPTZero scores<\/strong>: from 63% to 41%, but has minimal impact on ZeroGPT;

– If you\u2019re blogging and want to beat AI checkers without quality concerns, use SurferSEO unedited<\/strong>; for cleaner copy, improve SurferSEO with basic editing (it\u2019ll still give you lower AI scores);

– Human copy <\/strong>has the highest chance of being identified as non-AI by both testers, but AI testing is still highly unreliable.

– A good compromise<\/strong> is to use a mix of AI drafting and human editing and rewriting – that will give you lower overall AI scores and decent copy quality. But aiming to lower AI scores for the sake of it is not a good idea due to their inherent innacuracy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

One day robots may want to become humans, but right now companies are trying to fool AI detectors with tools that make your AI-created text look like it was written by a human. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

AI Humanizers claim to make your AI copy pass AI tests – essentially successfully cheating the AI checkers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But are they successful? Do they really fool the testers? Is the resulting copy any good? Is there any way to further improve the copy? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Answers to those questions (and more) incoming\u2026 brace yourselves.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Here\u2019s what we did to discover the effectiveness of content \u2018humanizers\u2019:<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
  1. Generated outrageously AI-ish blog copy and had our team re-write it from scratch (to create two control groups – one 100% AI, the other 0% AI) – for more on this see our GPTZero vs ZeroGPT test<\/strong><\/a>, it describes how we did that in a bit more detail;<\/li>
  2. Ran each AI sample through DeepL <\/a>and SurferSEO<\/a> to produce two \u201chumanized\u201d variants;<\/li>
  3. Tested both control samples and \u201chumanized\u201d copies against GPTZero<\/a> and ZeroGPT <\/a>(two of the most popular GPT testers out there);<\/li>
  4. Averaged out the scores and compared;<\/li>
  5. Analyzed the humanized output, and ran it through Grammarly<\/a> and our own ABBA AI detection tool<\/a> to see if it\u2019s any better.<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Here\u2019s the blunt data, open access so anyone can play with it on their own: <\/p>\n\n\n\n