Your Data Stays Yours
We never sell your files or use them for advertising, and we never use them to train our models. Your draft stays private to your account, remove it from your dashboard whenever you want, or ask us to erase it for good.
Run an originality and AI-pattern self-check on your own draft, for your own review. Compared against a broad index of web and published sources; your file is never added to a similarity database.
or click to browse

Drag & Drop your .docx or .pdf file. We support files up to 20MB.
Get a clear PDF report with similarity matches and AI-pattern highlights for your own review.

Cite what needs citing, and send passages of your own that need work to the Clarity Editor, which keeps your citations and formatting.
Detailed reports highlighting similarity matches in red and AI-style passages in blue.
AI Adoption in Mid-Market Operations
The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence has fundamentally reshaped how mid-market firms plan their operations.Established forecasting methods are being challengedby models capable of processing far larger source sets.
While some operators view this as a risk to process control, others argue thatthese tools can serve as powerful assistants, strengthening decision quality rather than replacing judgement. The key lies in verifiable source attribution.
However, the governance implications of automated analysisremain a subject of active debate across the sector.
Analysts have documented a significant correlation between adoption rates and shifts in reporting cadence across mid-market firms globally.
The operational implications of generative models extend beyond content production; they change how organisations evidence and defend a recommendation.
Firms that have implemented structured review programmes report measurable improvements in the critical evaluation of machine-generated analysis.
Internal policy frameworks must balance speed with accountability, ensuring review standards evolve alongside the tools available to the teams using them.
A systematic review of 47 sector studies conducted between 2021 and 2024 suggests that redesigning the review step is the most effective organisational response.
The analytical foundations of the work remain intact; however, the verification mechanisms employed by reporting teams require substantial reconsideration in light of these developments.
This file was analyzed without ever being added to a similarity database. It stays private to your account; remove it from your dashboard whenever you want, or ask us to erase it for good.
We never sell your files or use them for advertising, and we never use them to train our models. Your draft stays private to your account, remove it from your dashboard whenever you want, or ask us to erase it for good.
Similarity and AI-pattern scores are indicative estimates to guide your own review — not a guarantee of any other checker's score.
We compare your draft against a broad index of web and published sources through third-party AI-detection and similarity APIs.
Pay for what you use, or save with a monthly bundle.
Don't want a bundle? Buy exactly what you need.
One currency for Extended reports (350 tokens), the Clarity Editor (80 per 1,000 words) and the Elite Assistant. Packs bought outright never expire.
Careful researchers and professionals review their own work before they share it. A private originality self-check helps you catch a missing citation, an over-paraphrased passage, or a quote that needs attribution — so you can fix it yourself, on your own draft.
Our report also flags AI-style writing patterns as a neutral diagnostic. Because false positives can be unfair to non-native writers, we present these as indicative estimates to guide your review, not a verdict and not a guarantee of any other checker's score.
We compare your draft against published sources and never add it to them or to any shared database. It stays in your account, we never sell it or train on it, remove it from your dashboard whenever you want, or ask us to erase it for good.
The Extended report is the check itself: it shows how much of your draft reads as AI and adds a similarity check against published sources, in one PDF. It costs 350 tokens.
It compares your draft against a broad index of web and published sources via third-party AI-detection and similarity APIs. Results are indicative estimates to guide your own review — they are not a guarantee of any other checker's score.
Most checks are automated and completed in 1-3 minutes depending on the file size and server load.
Yes, as a neutral diagnostic. The report includes an AI-pattern estimate and highlights passages that read as AI-style writing (from tools such as ChatGPT, Claude, or Gemini), shown separately from similarity matches. These are indicative estimates to support your own review.
Your draft and its report stay private to your account, so you can open them again later. Your draft is never added to the sources it was compared against, we never sell your files or use them for advertising, remove them from your dashboard whenever you want, or ask us to erase them for good.
Yes — your self-check report is for your own review and is never shared. It is a private tool to help you find missing citations and review flagged passages in your own draft before you finalise it.
We support .DOCX and .PDF. For the best compatibility, we recommend uploading .DOCX files.
Get a private originality and AI-pattern report in minutes — for your own review.