# Desklib AI detector accuracy test on 900 texts

Source: https://toolbenchmarks.com/ai-detectors/desklib/  
Tested: 30 October 2026. Publisher: Tool Benchmarks. Data licence: CC BY 4.0.

> Desklib's AI detector flagged 6.3% of human-written texts in our test, the lowest false positive rate of any detector that catches a real share of AI writing, and it had the best AUROC (0.877). It caught 58.3% of AI texts, though, and only 32.5% of texts from Claude Fable 5.1.

Verdict: The most careful detector we tested and the best at telling AI from human text overall, but it misses about four in ten AI texts and most AI fiction.

| Measure | Result |
|---|---|
| Catches AI text | 58.3% (294 of 504) |
| Flags human text | 6.3% (8 of 126) |
| Catches humanized AI text | 32.5% |
| AUROC | 0.877 |
| Catches Claude Fable 5.1 | 32.5% |
| Catches Claude Haiku 5.5 | 74.6% |
| Catches Claude Opus 5.5 | 62.7% |
| Catches Claude Sonnet 5.5 | 63.5% |
| Flags human text: Academic abstracts | 8.0% |
| Flags human text: Q&A answers | 3.6% |
| Flags human text: Encyclopedia articles | 0.0% |
| Flags human text: Fiction | 0.0% |
| Flags human text: News reports | 20.8% |

## What Desklib is

Desklib is a company that sells study tools, and it published this detector as a free model. It is a fine-tuned DeBERTa-v3-large model, the largest classifier in our test, and its model card says it led the RAID benchmark leaderboard when it was released. We used the threshold of 0.5 from its model card.

## The fewest false accusations

Desklib flagged no human encyclopedia articles and no human fiction. Its false positives were mostly news reports: 5 of 24, or 20.8%. Q&A answers and academic abstracts were rarely flagged, at 3.6% and 8.0%.

Its AUROC of 0.877 was the best in the test. AUROC measures how well a detector's scores separate AI from human text across every possible threshold, so Desklib ranks texts better than any other detector here, even where its fixed threshold lets AI text through.

## What it misses

It caught 58.3% of AI texts overall. Fiction was its weak spot: it caught only 20.8% of AI-written fiction passages. It also struggled with Claude Fable 5.1, catching 32.5% of its texts, against 74.6% for Claude Haiku 5.5.

A humanizer rewrite nearly halved its catch rate on Opus texts, from 62.7% to 32.5%. If you use Desklib, read a pass as "probably not raw AI output", not as proof of human writing.

On an Apple M4 Pro it took 0.57 seconds per 1,000 words.

## Questions people ask

### Is the Desklib AI detector accurate?

It is the most accurate of the seven we tested at separating AI from human text, with an AUROC of 0.877. At its default threshold it caught 58.3% of AI texts and flagged 6.3% of human texts.

### Does Desklib flag human writing?

Rarely, but it happens. It flagged 8 of 126 human texts, and 5 of those were news reports, so news is where to be most careful with its verdict.

### Can Desklib detect humanized AI text?

Less well. Its catch rate on Claude Opus 5.5 texts fell from 62.7% to 32.5% after a light rewrite with a humanizer.