If an AI detector flags writing you produced yourself, save the original document and the result before changing anything. A flag is not proof of AI use. Find out what raised the concern, then gather the materials that explain how you wrote the piece.
Repeatedly rewriting a passage to get a lower score can make that explanation harder. Focus on the writing, the rules that apply and the evidence you already have.
Save the document and the exact result
Keep the submitted passage, the full document and the report you received. Note the date and the tool used. If only an excerpt was scanned, record where it appears in the full document.
That helps avoid discussing a result from one version while reading another. Keep the original even if you later correct a citation or improve the wording.
Find out what the concern actually is
Ask which passage raised a question and what rule is relevant. A teacher may be concerned about undisclosed assistance; an editor may be checking a contributor agreement. A source or citation issue is different from an AI detection result.
Our AI detection versus plagiarism guide explains that distinction. If the concern is unclear, request the specific passage and policy before trying to answer a general accusation.
Gather the materials you already have
Useful materials include an outline, research notes, earlier files, a reference list, comments or available version history. Choose the items that explain how your argument developed, rather than overwhelming the reviewer with unrelated records.
For example, an early outline may show why you chose one position over another. A revised paragraph may show how a source changed your reasoning. Those details can support a conversation about the work.
Not every writer has version history. Its absence does not establish AI use. Do not invent drafts, alter timestamps or give a false account of your process.
Explain any assistance honestly
Describe the tools or help you actually used. If you used proofreading, translation or brainstorming support, explain its role and check the course or workplace rules. Do not claim that assistance was permitted without reviewing those rules.
A low score from another detector does not prove your account is correct. Base your explanation on the work and the evidence, rather than on finding a more favourable score.
Ask for a fair review
You can keep the conversation specific and calm. A message might say:
I would like to understand which passage raised the concern and the policy being applied. I can share the notes and earlier drafts I have, and explain how I developed the argument. Could we review those materials alongside the detector result?
Adapt that wording to your situation and include only statements that are true. If a formal decision has already been made, follow the organisation's published review or appeal process and its deadlines.
Improve the draft for readers
Once the original is preserved, you can still improve unclear writing, correct factual errors and add missing citations. Make those changes because they improve the document, not because a detector might reward a particular style.
Keep useful evidence and avoid repeatedly submitting confidential writing to different services. Check permission and privacy requirements before sharing someone else's content.
What AIScan can help you review
AIScan provides an AI assessment and highlighted passages when available. It cannot certify authorship, decide whether assistance was allowed or guarantee a particular result from another tool.
Read our accuracy guidance and false-positive explainer. If you choose to check a passage, keep the result alongside your original writing and use it as one part of the review.