{"meta":{"exportedAt":"2026-11-02T07:17:34.363Z","formatVersion":2,"selection":{"q":"false-positive","system":"","harm":"","context":"","country":"","role":"","relation":"contextual","evidence":"","year":"","response":"","severity":"","verification":"","view":"incidents","sort":"added"},"totalIncidents":5,"coverage":{"cases":5,"countries":1,"languages":1,"unknownLocation":2,"locationPending":0,"unknownLanguage":0,"unknownDate":2,"lawsuits":0,"regulatory":2,"minors":0,"coreRelations":0,"contextualRelations":5,"mixedRelations":0,"unknownRelations":0,"relationPending":0,"relationUnknown":0},"countingNote":"Distinct public cases in this selection. People counts apply within individual cases only; cross-case person overlap has not been resolved. No population incidence estimate.","affectedCountNote":"Interpret person counts with affectedCountStatus and the reported effects. Unquantified zeros are placeholders, not a measured zero.","source":"AI incidents","publisher":"NOPE","url":"https://nope.net/incidents","license":"CC BY 4.0"},"incidents":[{"id":"2021-us-google-ai-flagged-fathers-medical-photos-of-toddlers-as-child-abuse-accounts-disabled-police-cleared","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'It was a Friday night in February 2021.'; 'The nurse said to send photos so the doctor could review them in advance.'; 'the doctor diagnosed the issue and prescribed antibiotics'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'The doctor used that image to diagnose'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"In February 2021 a San Francisco father photographed his toddler son's medical condition after a nurse asked for photos before a video consultation, and the doctor used them to diagnose the problem and prescribe antibiotics.","causal_attribution":"Background facts from the father's account to the Times."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Google developed an artificially intelligent tool that could recognize never-before-seen exploitative images of children'; 'this technology flagged them'; 'A human content moderator for Google would have reviewed the photos after they were flagged by the artificial intelligence'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'automatically uploaded to the cloud, Google’s system identified them as CSAM'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"When the photos were backed up to Google's servers, Google's AI tool for recognising never-before-seen child abuse images flagged them; a human moderator reviews flagged photos before Google locks an account and reports it.","causal_attribution":"The Times attributes the flag to Google's AI tool; the human review step is described as the general process."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'His account had been disabled because of “harmful content” that was “a severe violation of Google’s policies and might be illegal.”'; 'he had to get a new phone number with another carrier'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'ended up losing access to his emails, contacts, photos, and even his phone number'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"Two days after the photos were taken his Google account was disabled for harmful content; he lost email, contacts and photos, and his Google Fi phone number.","causal_attribution":"The account loss followed directly from Google's flag and decision."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'copies of the search warrants served on Google and his internet service provider'; '“I determined that the incident did not meet the elements of a crime and that no crime occurred,”'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'the San Francisco police department opened an investigation into him'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"San Francisco police obtained search warrants for his Google account and internet provider, and the investigator concluded that no crime had occurred.","causal_attribution":"The Times quotes the investigator's report; the report itself was not inspected."},{"id":"c5","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Google responded that it would not reinstate the account, with no further explanation.'; 'appealed his case to Google again, providing the police report, but to no avail'; 'his account was being permanently deleted'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"Google rejected his appeals, including one with the police report, and later notified him that the account was being permanently deleted.","causal_attribution":"Reported from the father's account to the Times."},{"id":"c6","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'the same scenario was playing out in Texas'; 'which made the broker suspicious until'; 'A detective from the Houston Police department called in the fall of 2021, asking him to come into the station.'; 'But he, too, was unable to get his decade-old Google account back'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"A Houston father whose photos of his toddler, taken at a paediatrician's request, were flagged the next day had his Gmail account disabled while buying a house; police called him in and cleared him, and he could not recover the account.","causal_attribution":"Reported by the Times from the second father's account."},{"id":"c7","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'A Google spokeswoman said the company stands by its decisions, even though law enforcement cleared the two men.'; 'reviewers had not detected a rash or redness in the photos he took'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'use a combination of hash matching technology and artificial intelligence to identify it and remove it from our platforms'; 'reviews flagged content for accuracy and consults with pediatricians'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"'Google has said it will stand by its decision'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"Google says it uses hash matching and artificial intelligence to identify child sexual abuse material, that its child-safety team reviews flagged content and consults paediatricians, and that it stands by its decisions although law enforcement cleared both men; it told the Times its reviewers saw no rash or redness and found a further video it considered problematic.","causal_attribution":"Google's account disputes that the decisions were wrong."}],"effects":[{"label":"Google accounts disabled and police investigations after AI flagged medical photos as child abuse material","claim_id":"c3","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/21/technology/google-surveillance-toddler-photo.html","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-11-02 through the Internet Archive capture web.archive.org/web/20221231230516id_/ of the article (HTTP 200; the live page returned 403); no translation and no human reviewer.","independence_group":"nyt-aug-2022-google-flagged-fathers-report"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://www.theverge.com/2022/8/21/23315513/google-photos-csam-scanning-account-deletion-investigation","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-11-02 (HTTP 200); no translation. Relays the Times report; the Google statement it carries was emailed to The Verge.","independence_group":"nyt-aug-2022-google-flagged-fathers-report"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/aug/22/google-csam-account-blocked","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-11-02 (HTTP 200); no translation. Relays the Times report and carries a Google spokesperson statement.","independence_group":"nyt-aug-2022-google-flagged-fathers-report"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["institutional_use"],"contexts":["privacy","health","justice","everyday_life"],"unknowns":["Whether either account was ever reinstated or either father sued after August 2022.","What the human reviewer saw and decided in each case, beyond the general process the Times describes.","The content of the further video Google says it found, which the father does not remember."],"geography":{"basis":"The Times places the first father in San Francisco and his investigation with the San Francisco Police Department, and the second in Houston, Texas, questioned by Houston police.","court_countries":[],"event_countries":["US"],"affected_person_countries":["US"]},"publication":{"basis":"Google's AI classifier made a claim about each father's photos that informed Google's decision to disable his account and report him, after which police investigated and cleared him. The account rests on the New York Times report and Google's own statements, which dispute that the decisions were wrong.","reviewed_on":"2026-11-02"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The New York Times reports that Google's artificial-intelligence tool for recognising never-before-seen child abuse images flagged the fathers' medical photos when they were backed up to Google's servers. That flag led Google to disable their accounts and report them, which led to the police investigations. Google confirms it uses AI alongside hash matching and that human reviewers check flagged content, so the AI flag informed the human decision.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["made_claim_about","informed_decision_about"]},"name":"Google's AI flagged two fathers' medical photos of their toddlers as child abuse; accounts disabled, police investigated then cleared them, NYT reports","summary":"In February 2021 a San Francisco father took photos of his toddler son's medical condition after a nurse asked for photos before a video consultation; the doctor used them to diagnose the problem and prescribe antibiotics. The New York Times reported in August 2022 that when the photos were backed up from his Android phone to Google's servers, Google's artificial-intelligence tool for recognising never-before-seen child abuse images flagged them. Two days after the photos were taken his Google account was disabled for 'harmful content', which cost him more than a decade of email, contacts and photos and, through Google Fi, his phone number. Google reported him to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, and the San Francisco police obtained search warrants for his account; the investigator concluded that no crime had occurred. Google refused to reinstate the account after two appeals, the second with the police report, and later notified him that it was being permanently deleted. The Times reported a second father in Houston whose photos of his toddler, taken at a paediatrician's request, were also flagged; his Gmail account was disabled in the middle of buying a house, Houston police questioned and cleared him, and he did not get the account back. Google said it stood by its decisions and that its reviewers had found a further video in the San Francisco father's account that it considered problematic.","incidentDate":"2021-02-01","incidentKind":"bounded_series","incidentDatePrecision":"month","exposurePattern":"single_interaction","reportedDate":"2022-08-21","aiSystem":"Google's machine-learning tool for recognising never-before-seen child sexual abuse images (used with hash matching), applied to photos backed up from Android phones to Google's servers, followed by human review","aiProduct":"Google CSAM image classifier","severity":"medium","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["legal_harm","other_material_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"The New York Times reports that Google's AI flagged two fathers' medical photos of their toddlers as child abuse material, after which Google disabled their accounts (losing years of email, photos and, for one, his phone number) and police investigated both before clearing them; Google refused to reinstate the accounts.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"supported","participantUsersAffectedMin":2,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":0,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"Two account holders: the San Francisco and Houston fathers whose accounts were disabled and who were investigated. Their sons, counted by the CyberTipline among potential new child victims, and the San Francisco father's wife are not counted as harmed people.","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"US","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"investigation_opened","outcomeStatus":"unknown","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/21/technology/google-surveillance-toddler-photo.html","primarySourceLabel":"The New York Times, 21 Aug 2022: Google flagged a father as a criminal over medical photos of his toddler taken for the doctor","firstPublishedAt":"2026-11-02T03:05:51.915854+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-11-02T03:05:51.915854+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["google","child-safety-classifier","account-disabled","police-investigation","medical-photos","privacy","false-positive"]},{"id":"2019-us-rite-aid-facial-recognition-false-matches-led-staff-to-search-and-eject-shoppers-ftc-says","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'The technology generated alerts sent to Rite Aid’s employees, including by email or mobile phone application notifications (“match alerts”), indicating that individuals who had entered Rite Aid stores were matches for entries in Rite Aid’s watchlist database.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"Rite Aid used facial recognition in its stores to send employees match alerts saying that people entering were matches for its watchlist database, and employees acted on the alerts.","causal_attribution":"FTC allegation; Rite Aid neither admits nor denies."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'In numerous instances, the match alerts that led to these actions were false positives' and 'Rite Aid employees recorded thousands of false positive match alerts between December 2019 and July 2020.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The FTC alleges that in numerous instances the alerts that led employees to watch, eject, accuse, search or report customers to police were false positives, and that employees recorded thousands of false-positive alerts between December 2019 and July 2020.","causal_attribution":"FTC allegation from Rite Aid records; not adjudicated."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Rite Aid employees stopped and searched an 11-year-old girl on the basis of a false- positive facial recognition match. The girl’s mother told Rite Aid that she had missed work because her daughter was so distraught by the incident.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"Employees stopped and searched an 11-year-old girl on a false-positive match; her mother told Rite Aid she missed work because her daughter was so distraught.","causal_attribution":"FTC allegation based on a complaint to Rite Aid."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'an alert indicating that a consumer—' and 'specifically a Black woman—was a match for an enrollment image that Rite Aid employees' and 'described as depicting “a white lady with blonde hair.” In response to the alert, Rite Aid' and 'employees called the police and asked the woman to leave the store before realizing the alert was'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The system matched a Black woman to an enrollment image employees described as a white woman with blonde hair; employees called the police and asked her to leave before realising the alert was false.","causal_attribution":"FTC allegation drawn from Rite Aid's internal investigation."},{"id":"c5","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Consumers complained to Rite Aid that they had experienced humiliation and feelings of stigmatization as a result of being confronted' and '[E]very black man is not [a] thief nor should they be made to feel like one' and 'I feel different from this experience when I walk into a store now it’s weird.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"Customers complained of humiliation and stigmatisation from false-positive stops; one wrote of feeling different entering stores afterwards and of being made to feel like a thief.","causal_attribution":"Consumer complaints as quoted by the FTC."},{"id":"c6","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"'are prohibited for five (5) years from the effective date of this Order from deploying or using, or assisting in the deployment or use of, any Facial Recognition or Analysis System' and 'Defendants neither admit nor deny any of the allegations in the Complaint'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"Rite Aid agreed to a proposed stipulated order prohibiting it for five years from using facial recognition or analysis systems in retail stores, while neither admitting nor denying the complaint's allegations.","causal_attribution":"Terms of the filed proposed order; its entry by the court was not inspected."}],"effects":[{"label":"girl stopped and searched on a false facial-recognition match","claim_id":"c3","direction":"negative"},{"label":"police called and customer asked to leave on a false match","claim_id":"c4","direction":"negative"},{"label":"humiliation and stigmatisation from false-positive stops","claim_id":"c5","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/2023190_riteaid_complaint_filed.pdf","kind":"court_filing","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-22 from the Internet Archive capture (ftc.gov direct returned 404); no translation needed. FTC complaint, E.D. Pa. 2:23-cv-05023, Document 1, filed 19 Dec 2023; the text of page 1 was not extractable.","independence_group":"ftc-v-rite-aid-2023-filings"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/2023190_riteaid_stipulated_order_filed.pdf","kind":"court_filing","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-22 from the Internet Archive capture (ftc.gov direct returned 404); no translation needed. Proposed stipulated order and attached decision and order, Document 2-2, filed 19 Dec 2023.","independence_group":"ftc-v-rite-aid-2023-filings"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["institutional_use"],"contexts":["everyday_life","privacy"],"unknowns":["When and where the girl was searched and the police were called on the woman.","Which vendors supplied the technology (the complaint does not name them in the text read).","Whether and when the court entered the proposed order.","How many customers were stopped, searched or ejected on false matches."],"geography":{"basis":"The complaint places Rite Aid's facial recognition use in its US stores (New York City, Los Angeles and other US cities); it was filed in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The described customers' countries are not stated.","court_countries":["US"],"event_countries":["US"],"affected_person_countries":[]},"publication":{"basis":"Published as a contextual case (made_claim_about, informed_decision_about): the FTC alleges Rite Aid's facial recognition wrongly matched customers to a watchlist and staff acted on the false alerts by searching an 11-year-old girl and calling police on a woman; Rite Aid agreed to a five-year ban without admitting the allegations.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-22"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The FTC complaint says Rite Aid's facial recognition system compared customers' faces with a watchlist and sent employees match alerts, that the alerts were in numerous instances false positives (the system wrongly identified a person as someone in the database), and that employees acted on those false alerts by searching an 11-year-old girl, calling police on a Black woman and asking customers to leave. The system's own wrong matches are the alleged error; Rite Aid neither admits nor denies.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["made_claim_about","informed_decision_about"]},"name":"US: FTC says Rite Aid's facial recognition falsely matched shoppers to a watchlist, leading staff to search an 11-year-old girl and call police on a woman","summary":"In a complaint filed in federal court in Pennsylvania on 19 December 2023, the US Federal Trade Commission alleged that the pharmacy chain Rite Aid used facial recognition in its stores to match customers against a database of people it suspected of shoplifting or other wrongdoing, and that staff acted on the match alerts by following, searching, ejecting and publicly accusing customers and by calling the police. The FTC says many alerts were false positives: employees recorded thousands of false-positive alerts between December 2019 and July 2020, staff stopped and searched an 11-year-old girl on a false match, and employees called the police on a Black woman matched to an image of a white woman with blonde hair. Rite Aid agreed to a proposed order barring it from using facial recognition in retail stores for five years, without admitting or denying the allegations.","incidentDate":"2019-12-01","incidentEndDate":"2020-07-01","incidentKind":"bounded_series","incidentDatePrecision":"month","exposurePattern":"single_interaction","reportedDate":"2023-12-19","aiSystem":"Facial recognition technology from two vendors (not named in the complaint) that Rite Aid deployed in its stores to compare customers' faces with a watchlist database and send match alerts to employees","aiProduct":"Unidentified facial recognition system","severity":"medium","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["psychological_distress","reputational_harm","other_material_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"The FTC alleges that false facial-recognition matches led Rite Aid staff to search, eject, publicly accuse and call police on customers, including an 11-year-old girl who was searched and a Black woman on whom police were called; customers described humiliation and stigmatisation.","frameworkFacets":[],"pathwayDirection":"inward","causationStatus":"alleged","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":3,"affectedCountStatus":"partial","affectedCountEvidence":"Three people described individually in the complaint: the 11-year-old girl searched on a false match, the Black woman on whom police were called, and the customer who wrote about being treated as a thief. The complaint's thousands of recorded false-positive alerts are alerts, not counted people, so others remain unquantified.","victimAgeRange":"unknown","jurisdiction":"US","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"regulatory_action","outcomeStatus":"unknown","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/2023190_riteaid_complaint_filed.pdf","primarySourceLabel":"FTC v. Rite Aid Corp., E.D. Pa. 2:23-cv-05023, complaint filed 19 Dec 2023","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-22T03:13:38.451275+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-22T03:13:38.451275+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["facial_recognition","retail","alleged_false_match","ftc"]},{"id":"2026-ao3-fan-fiction-writer-deleted-works-after-longtime-reader-cited-pangram-100-percent-ai-first-person","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'I the other month got accused of ai, which I have never used and said that Pangram said it was 100% ai.'; 'It was one of my regulars who had been reading and commenting for years.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The writer says a reader accused them of using AI and said that Pangram had rated their work 100% AI, and that the accuser was a regular reader who had read and commented for years.","causal_attribution":"Writer's account of the accusation; the accuser's message and the Pangram report were not published."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'So I tried Pangram myself and if did indeed say that. But I hadn’t used ai.'; 'I tried something I just wrote on the spot. 100% Ai. Texts from high school (2010’s). 100% AI.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The writer says they have never used AI, and that when they ran Pangram themselves on something written on the spot and on texts from high school in the 2010s, it returned 100% AI each time.","causal_attribution":"Writer's own test, reported without screenshots; the writer's statement that the texts are their own is not independently established."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'So I deleted all my works. And my account. Because rather I know my truth than lots of people accuse me of using ai.'; 'Yeah, I feel sad about it'; 'And I know I can never put them back because then they’re probably really going to be called AI.'; 'Yeah, I just kinda feel tired and done with the site'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The writer says they deleted all their works and their AO3 account rather than face further accusations, feel sad about it, and believe they can never repost the works.","causal_attribution":"Writer's own statement of the action taken and its effect; the writer links the deletion to the accusation."}],"effects":[{"label":"accused by a longtime reader of AI use on the strength of a Pangram '100% AI' result, which the writer disputes (poster's account)","claim_id":"c1","direction":"negative"},{"label":"deleted all their fan fiction and their AO3 account and reports feeling sad and done with the site (poster's account)","claim_id":"c3","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueOffMyChest/comments/1x35cjd/deleted_ao3_account/","kind":"forum_post","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-12: full self-text and the thread's 17 comments retrieved through the arctic_shift archive API by post ID (HTTP 200), after the post surfaced in the reddit.com new.rss feed; no translation and no human reviewer. The poster handle is not recorded.","independence_group":"reddit-ao3-writer-pangram"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["others_use"],"contexts":["everyday_life"],"unknowns":["When the accusation and the deletion happened: the post of 11 October 2026 says only that the accusation came 'the other month'.","What Pangram's reports showed, which text was tested and whether the accusing reader shared the report.","The fandom, the accuser and whether the accusation spread beyond the reader's comment.","Whether the writer kept copies of the deleted works."],"geography":{"basis":"The post names no place or country, and the platform (AO3) and the subreddit are not used to infer one. Unknown after review.","court_countries":[],"event_countries":[],"affected_person_countries":[]},"publication":{"basis":"Published under the public-forum rule as a concrete first-person account of a writer accused of AI use on the strength of a reported AI-text-detector result, described with attribution and without corroboration. No handle, fandom or place is recorded.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-12"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The writer reports that the accusing reader cited a Pangram result rating the writer's work 100% AI, and that Pangram also returned 100% AI on text the writer had just written and on 2010s school texts. The relation recorded is the detector's reported claim about the authorship of the writer's work, which the reader relied on to accuse the writer; the writer says the accusation led to the deletion of all the works and the account. The detector reports were not published.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["made_claim_about"]},"name":"First-person post: fan-fiction writer says a longtime reader accused them of AI use citing a Pangram '100% AI' result, and they deleted their works and account","summary":"In a post to r/TrueOffMyChest on 11 October 2026, a writer who had posted fan fiction on Archive of Our Own (AO3) since 2023 says a reader accused them of using AI and said that Pangram, an AI-text detector, had rated their work 100% AI. The writer says they have never used AI. They say they then ran Pangram themselves on something written on the spot and on texts from their high-school years in the 2010s, and each came back 100% AI. They say they deleted all their works and their AO3 account rather than face further accusations, and that they feel sad and can never repost the works. In a reply the writer says the accuser was a regular reader who had commented for years. The account is uncorroborated: the accusation, the Pangram results and the deleted works were not published.","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"unknown","exposurePattern":"single_interaction","reportedDate":"2026-10-11","aiSystem":"Pangram, an AI-text detector, which by the writer's account a reader used to rate the writer's fan fiction 100% AI, and which returned 100% AI when the writer tested it on newly written and 2010s school texts","aiProduct":"Pangram AI-text detector (reported)","severity":"low","verificationStatus":"unverified","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["reputational_harm","psychological_distress"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"A fan-fiction writer reports being accused of AI use by a longtime reader on the strength of a Pangram '100% AI' result, which the writer disputes, and says they deleted all their works and their AO3 account and feel sad and done with the site (first-person account, uncorroborated).","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"alleged","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One person, the writer, reports the accusation and its effects. The writer was not the detector's user in the accusation (a reader ran it), so the writer is counted among other people harmed. The accusing reader is not counted.","victimAgeRange":"unknown","jurisdiction":"unknown","platformType":"other","outcomeStatus":"unknown","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueOffMyChest/comments/1x35cjd/deleted_ao3_account/","primarySourceLabel":"Reddit r/TrueOffMyChest, 11 Oct 2026: Deleted ao3 account","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-12T03:25:17.85806+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-12T03:25:17.85806+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["first-person","reddit","pangram","ai-text-detector","false-positive-alleged","fan-fiction","creative-work"]},{"id":"2026-florida-atlantic-university-students-zero-grades-after-ai-detection-flags","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'a sophomore studying computer science at FAU, submitted a paper last year and received a zero after his professor flagged it for AI use after applying it to Turnitin'; 'he received a better grade'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"A computer science sophomore submitted a paper and received a zero after the professor flagged it for AI use after applying it to Turnitin; after the student emailed the professor, the student received a better grade.","causal_attribution":"The newspaper's account, resting on the student's interview. The professor's account and the Turnitin report are not given."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'I ran it through an AI detector [Turnitin] myself to see why it got flagged, and the AI said my writing was overly human-sounding'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"That student says they ran the paper through an AI detector themselves and it said the writing was overly human-sounding.","causal_attribution":"Student's own statement. The bracketed tool name is the newspaper's insertion."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'was accused of using AI on an essay and received a zero for the assignment, with little to no communication or resolution from her professor'; 'her professor waived the penalty and gave her a 50'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"A senior sociology major was accused of using AI on an essay and received a zero with little to no communication from the professor; after the student emailed to say no AI was used, the professor waived the penalty and gave a 50.","causal_attribution":"The newspaper's account, resting on the student's interview. The professor's account is not given."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'explains her frustration with receiving a bad grade due to a false AI detection'; 'I ended up getting a horrible grade on something that I'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The newspaper describes the second student's grade as due to a false AI detection; the student says they got a horrible grade for something they did not do. The tool is not named.","causal_attribution":"The newspaper's characterisation and the student's statement. Whether a detector was used in this case and which one is not stated."}],"effects":[{"label":"zero grade on a paper after the professor flagged it for AI use after applying Turnitin; later improved (student account as reported)","claim_id":"c1","direction":"negative"},{"label":"zero grade on an essay after an accusation of AI use the student denies; later changed to 50 (student account as reported)","claim_id":"c3","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.upressonline.com/2026/09/flawed-ai-detection-is-breaking-trust-within-particular-fau-classrooms/","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English in full. Student newspaper report based on interviews with the two students and two faculty members.","independence_group":"fau-university-press"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["institutional_use"],"contexts":["education"],"unknowns":["When each assignment was submitted: the article says 'last year' for the first student, which may mean calendar 2025 or the previous academic year, and gives no date for the second.","Which detection tool, if any, was used in the second student's case.","What the Turnitin report showed and what the professors say happened.","The first student's final grade."],"geography":{"basis":"The accounts concern coursework at Florida Atlantic University, whose Boca Raton campus the article pictures; the university is in Florida, United States. The students' countries of residence are not stated.","court_countries":[],"event_countries":["US"],"affected_person_countries":[]},"publication":{"basis":"Published as two concrete, individually described accounts of students given zero grades after AI-detection flags, reported by their university's student newspaper and attributed to the students. The accounts are uncorroborated, and the students are not named in this record.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-05"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The student newspaper reports that the first student's professor flagged the paper for AI use after applying it to Turnitin, and describes the second student's grade as due to a false AI detection without naming the tool. The relation recorded is the detector's reported claim about the authorship of each student's work. No detector report was published.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["made_claim_about"]},"name":"Two Florida Atlantic University students told the student newspaper they received zero grades after their work was flagged as AI-written, one after a professor applied Turnitin; both grades were raised after the students emailed their professors","summary":"The University Press, Florida Atlantic University's student newspaper, reported on 29 September 2026 the accounts of two students who say they were penalised over AI-detection flags. A computer science sophomore submitted a paper 'last year' and received a zero after the professor flagged it for AI use after applying it to Turnitin; after the student emailed the professor, the grade was improved. The student says that when they ran the paper through a detector, it said the writing was overly human-sounding. A senior sociology major was accused of using AI on an essay and received a zero with little communication from the professor; after the student emailed to say no AI was used, the professor waived the penalty and gave a 50. The newspaper describes the second student's grade as due to a false AI detection and does not name the tool in that case. No professor's or university account of either case is reported.","incidentKind":"bounded_series","incidentDatePrecision":"unknown","exposurePattern":"unknown","reportedDate":"2026-09-29","aiSystem":"Turnitin's AI-writing detection, which the student newspaper says the first student's professor applied to the paper; the tool behind the second student's accusation is not named, and the newspaper describes it as 'a false AI detection'","aiProduct":"Turnitin AI-text detector (reported)","aiCompany":"Turnitin","severity":"low","verificationStatus":"unverified","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["educational_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"Two students say they received zero grades after their work was flagged as AI-written, in one case after the professor applied Turnitin. Both say the grades were raised after they emailed their professors, the second only to 50 (students' accounts as reported by the student newspaper).","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"alleged","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":2,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"Two students whose own accounts the article reports, each given a zero after an AI flag. They did not use the detector, so they are counted among people harmed through institutional use. The article's arithmetic about how many papers could be flagged is a projection and is not counted.","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"US-FL","platformType":"other","outcomeStatus":"resolved","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.upressonline.com/2026/09/flawed-ai-detection-is-breaking-trust-within-particular-fau-classrooms/","primarySourceLabel":"University Press (Florida Atlantic University), 29 September 2026: \"Flawed AI detection is breaking trust within particular FAU classrooms\"","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-05T03:19:48.28574+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-05T03:19:48.28574+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["made-claim-about","ai-text-detector","turnitin","academic-integrity","education","false-positive-alleged","student-newspaper","florida"]},{"id":"2026-turnitin-ai-checker-marks-ap-research-student-annotations-100-percent-ai-teacher-accusation-first-person","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'i am currently taking ap research, and today my teacher told me that my source annotations were found to be'; '100% ai'; 'from turnitin'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The student says that on the day of the post their teacher told them their AP Research source annotations had been found to be '100% ai' by Turnitin.","causal_attribution":"Student's account of what the teacher said; the detector report was not published."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'i did not use ai nor would i have to for writing ANNOTATIONS'; 'my document history shows me typing over the course of an hour'; 'some of the sentences in my annotations i pulled nearly identical to my notes written beforehand'; 'i have taken a research course with the same rigor and writing assignment requirements with this teacher the year before, and have never in my life been faced with ai accusations'; 'we also had to do an assignment before the annotations where we bullet notes, facts, and general statistics we plan to write about'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The student says they did not use AI, that their document history shows them typing over the course of an hour, that some sentences closely follow notes written beforehand for a class assignment, and that they faced no AI accusation in a research course with the same teacher the previous year.","causal_attribution":"Student's own account; the document history was not published, and one commenter doubted the account."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'my teacher told me that the feedback from turnitin ai checker never ends up being a false accusation'; 'my teacher told me we would talk about it at a later time'; 'my teacher is showing no sign of going against the turnitin ai checker'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The student says the teacher said Turnitin's AI checker feedback never ends up being a false accusation, said they would talk about it later, and showed no sign of going against the checker.","causal_attribution":"Student's account of the teacher's statements."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'it honestly makes me really upset'; 'how would i even defend myself'; reply by the poster: 'i feel so insulted'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The student says the accusation makes them really upset, that they feel insulted, and that they do not know how to defend themselves.","causal_attribution":"Student's own statement of the effect."}],"effects":[{"label":"accused by a teacher of AI use after a reported Turnitin AI-checker result of 100% AI on source annotations, which the student disputes (poster's account)","claim_id":"c1","direction":"negative"},{"label":"distress and uncertainty about how to answer the accusation (poster's account)","claim_id":"c4","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.reddit.com/r/ApplyingToCollege/comments/1wumzxm/teacher_accusing_me_of_ai/","kind":"forum_post","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English on 2026-10-01: full self-text and the thread's 6 comments retrieved through the arctic_shift archive API by post ID. The poster handle is not recorded.","independence_group":"reddit-ap-research-student"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["institutional_use"],"contexts":["education"],"unknowns":["The local date: the post says 'today' and was published at 01:46 UTC on 1 October 2026, which is 30 September or 1 October depending on the student's time zone.","The student's age, school and country.","What the Turnitin report showed and how the teacher used it.","Whether the result affected the student's grade or led to any academic-integrity process."],"geography":{"basis":"The post names no school, place or country, and the course name is not used to infer one. Unknown after review.","court_countries":[],"event_countries":[],"affected_person_countries":[]},"publication":{"basis":"Published under the 2026-09-15 charter's public-forum rule as a concrete first-person account of a student accused of AI use on the strength of a reported AI-detector result, described with attribution and without corroboration. The student may be a minor, so no handle, school or place is recorded.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-01"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The student reports that the teacher attributed a '100% ai' result on the student's annotations to Turnitin's AI checker; the report was not published. The relation recorded is the detector's reported claim about the authorship of the student's work, which the teacher relied on.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["made_claim_about"]},"name":"First-person forum account: a student in an AP Research course says their teacher reported that Turnitin's AI checker found their source annotations '100% AI' and said the checker never gives false accusations; the student says they wrote the work themselves and can show document history","summary":"In a public post to r/ApplyingToCollege early on 1 October 2026 (UTC), a student taking the Advanced Placement (AP) Research course writes that their teacher told them that day that their source annotations had been found to be '100% ai' by Turnitin. The student says they did not use AI. They say their document history shows them typing over the course of an hour and that some sentences closely follow notes they wrote for an earlier assignment. They also say they had faced no AI accusation in a research course with the same teacher the year before. By the student's account, the teacher said the matter would be discussed later and that Turnitin's AI checker feedback never ends up being a false accusation. The student says the accusation leaves them upset and unsure how to defend themselves. No grade or disciplinary outcome is reported. The account is uncorroborated, and one commenter doubted it.","incidentDate":"2026-09-30","incidentEndDate":"2026-10-01","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"range","exposurePattern":"single_interaction","reportedDate":"2026-10-01","aiSystem":"Turnitin's AI-writing detection ('turnitin ai checker' in the student's words), named by the teacher who reported its result to the student; the report itself was not published","aiProduct":"Turnitin AI-text detector (reported)","aiCompany":"Turnitin","severity":"low","verificationStatus":"unverified","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["educational_harm","psychological_distress"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"A student reports that a teacher accused them of AI use on the strength of a Turnitin AI-checker result of '100% AI' on their source annotations, which the student disputes, and says the accusation leaves them upset and unsure how to defend themselves (first-person account, uncorroborated).","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"alleged","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One person: the student whose work the detector result concerned and who reports the accusation and its effect. The student did not use the detector, so they are counted among people harmed through institutional use. Exact 1.","victimAgeRange":"unknown","jurisdiction":"unknown","platformType":"other","outcomeStatus":"pending","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.reddit.com/r/ApplyingToCollege/comments/1wumzxm/teacher_accusing_me_of_ai/","primarySourceLabel":"r/ApplyingToCollege, 1 October 2026: \"teacher accusing me of ai\"","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-01T03:11:50.19209+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-01T03:11:50.19209+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["first-person","reddit","turnitin","ai-text-detector","academic-integrity","education","false-positive-alleged","made-claim-about"]}]}