{
  "id": 19679408,
  "title": "GPT-4.5 Fooled 73% of Judges: 20 Turing Tests, Detectors and Fakes to Check Your AI Radar",
  "url": "https://urgent.news/2026/11/12/gpt-4-5-fooled-73-of-judges-20-turing-tests-detectors-and-fakes-to",
  "topic": "ai",
  "section": "AI",
  "published": "2026-11-12T16:46:04.000Z",
  "source": {
    "name": "HackerNoon",
    "slug": "hackernoon",
    "url": "https://hackernoon.com/gpt-45-fooled-73percent-of-judges-20-turing-tests-detectors-and-fakes-to-check-your-ai-radar?source=rss"
  },
  "original_language": "en",
  "account": "In a 2025 study from UC San Diego, participants identified GPT-4.5 as human 73% of the time, more often than they recognized genuine humans. ELIZA, a chatbot from the 1960s, achieved 23%, closely followed by GPT-4o at 21%. The study comprised 20 Turing Test scenarios to help differentiate between humans and AI across chat, text, faces, art, voice, and video. A three-party Turing test involving 284 participants revealed that GPT-4.5 with a persona prompt won 73% of the time, while LLaMa-3.1-405B secured 56%. The public versions of AI were found to be equally convincing, with participants correctly identifying bots only 68% of the time and humans 73% of the time. The test extended beyond chat, with a blind listening study showing listeners were essentially guessing at close to 50% accuracy when trying to distinguish AI-composed piano music.",
  "summary": "People picked GPT-4.5 as human 73% of the time. Try 20 Turing tests, AI detectors and deepfake generators to see if you can still spot the AI.",
  "key_points": [],
  "editors_take": null,
  "illustration": null,
  "coverage": {
    "outlets": 1,
    "also_reported_by": []
  },
  "ai_generated": true,
  "disclaimer": "Summaries, key points and the editor’s take are written by software from other outlets’ reporting and may contain errors — always check the linked original."
}