Pope Leo's texts were verified as human by AI detection tools.

      To counter allegations that a machine assisted in crafting his messages, an anti-AI Pope turned to an unexpected ally: AI itself. An Australian company has validated that Pope Leo XIV's writings are human-generated, utilizing a range of detection tools developed by the technology.

      Pope Leo XIV has prominently featured AI in his discourse. His inaugural encyclical, Magnifica Humanitas, released in May, cautioned against the potential for technology to overpower humanity. A newly certified compilation of his thoughts on education and AI, titled Maps of Hope, has been confirmed as authored by humans.

      The uncomfortable context

      This certification emerged after a troubling incident. Shortly after the encyclical's release, AI researcher Linch Zhang claimed in a widely circulated analysis that elements of it bore AI characteristics. He referenced the frequent use of em dashes, the term “genuinely,” and rhetorical triads, suggesting that the likely source was Anthropic’s AI model, Claude.

      The detection tool Pangram identified some passages as problematic. The Verge posed a pertinent question: did the Pope utilize AI to discuss AI's perils? Zhang clarified that it was likely Vatican officials, rather than Leo himself, who may have used AI. The Vatican did not validate this assertion, and it remained unproven.

      Introducing the human certifiers

      The latest updates from the EU tech landscape, insights from our founder Boris, and some dubious AI-generated art are available. Subscribe now for weekly delivery to your inbox! This backdrop sets the stage for the new validation. Proudly Human is led by Alan Finkel, Australia’s former chief scientist. It confirmed that Maps of Hope is human-written and awarded it the organization's trust mark. The book was produced by the Australian Catholic University in collaboration with the Vatican’s Dicastery for Culture and Education, featuring a foreword by Cardinal José Tolentino de Mendonça.

      Finkel describes the certification as central to the initiative. “With the Pope’s focus on AI and human authorship, it indicates that this is no longer a niche discussion,” he stated. “It’s the defining issue of our time.”

      The certification process involves both paperwork and technology. Authors must verify their identities and declare that AI did not compose the initial draft or any sentences. Proudly Human then analyzes the text using what Finkel describes as “a suite of four or five” AI detection tools, alongside its own averaging algorithm. The assessment concluded that the collection was “essentially entirely human.” In essence, the validation of humanity relies on machinery.

      A 'fundamental right'

      Finkel argues that, in the absence of legal requirements forcing authors to disclose AI utilization, readers have the right to know who or what generated a text. “I believe it’s a fundamental right,” he asserted. This is particularly true for religious leaders, he claimed, as congregations expect authentic wisdom from those delivering sermons.

      This demand underscores an increasing desire for assurance that a person, rather than a program, created the work. However, a downside exists: AI detection is not a settled science. Detection tools can yield inconsistent results and make errors.

      The limitations of detectors

      The Atlantic has cautioned that excessive reliance on tools like Pangram could lead to a witch hunt mentality. Some human writers may be flagged simply because AI has adapted to mimic their style. Thus, a certificate's reliability hinges on the detectors employed, which remain imperfect.

      This situation illustrates the trajectory of the ongoing debate about AI. As machine-generated content proliferates online, provenance is becoming a vital measure of trust and an emerging business opportunity. Proudly Human markets its certification as the organic or fair-trade equivalent for human writing. That the Pope serves as the test case, with an AI detection tool acting as the referee, only emphasizes this point.