Head to head · September 2026 cycle
StealthBypass vs Super Humanizer
Super Humanizer finished 21.6 points ahead of StealthBypass in the September 2026 cycle, 60.97 to 39.38, ranking #11 against #13 in a field of 14. Super Humanizer scored higher on 1 of 5 detectors and 7 of 7 writing categories. StealthBypass came out ahead on GPTZero (69.3 vs 54.6), bypass rate (78.6 vs 64.4) and consistency across categories (80.7 vs 68.5). The bypass-rate gap, 78.6 to 64.4, sits inside both tools' 95% confidence intervals, so treat bypass as a draw.
- Detectors
- 4 – 1
- Categories
- 0 – 7
- Components
- 3 – 2
33 prompts · Last tested · Methodology v1.2.0
Score components
What the overall score is made of: bypass rate weighs 42%, meaning preservation 32%, readability 16%, consistency across categories 10%. Output-quality penalties come off the total. How scoring works →
CIs overlap marks a gap that sits inside both tools' published 95% confidence intervals for that component; it may not survive another cycle.
Detector by detector
Share of each tool's outputs that a detector classified as human-written. StealthBypass took 4 of 5.
Writing categories
Category score per writing context: bypass credit only for real rewrites, blended with the category's own meaning preservation and readability. Small categories swing; the prompt count is shown on each row. How category scores work →
Where each one wins
Every measure above that one tool won outright, largest margin first within each group.
StealthBypass
7 wins- Bypass rate Score 78.6 vs 64.4
- Consistency Score 80.7 vs 68.5
- Readability Score 54.1 vs 52.1
- GPTZero Detector 69.3 vs 54.6
- ZeroGPT Detector 84.4 vs 76.9
- Winston AI Detector 56.3 vs 52.2
- Copyleaks Detector 65.1 vs 63.7
Super Humanizer
10 wins- Penalties Score −5.0 vs −23.0
- Meaning preservation Score 74.2 vs 39.5
- Originality.ai Detector 71.0 vs 58.5
- News Article Category 73.9 vs 35.3
- Application Essay Category 62.5 vs 24.5
- Marketing Copy Category 51.2 vs 18.9
- Blog Post Category 58.8 vs 28.2
- Business Email Category 53.7 vs 26.0
- Discussion Board Category 61.9 vs 42.8
- Academic Essay Category 55.2 vs 39.9
Same prompt, both outputs
Both tools were given this AI-written passage in the September 2026 cycle. Below it is what each one returned. This prompt was picked by a fixed rule, not by how the tools scored.
AI-written input
Every tool on this prompt →News Article · News Article · written by Gemini 3.5 Flash · 366 words
**Digital Dilemma: Rising Screen Time Linked to Adolescent Mental Health Crisis**
**CHICAGO** — A comprehensive new study has reignited the national debate over youth screen time, linking excessive digital device use to a significant rise in anxiety, depression, and sleep deprivation among American teenagers.
The report, published Tuesday by the pediatric research group *Healthy Minds Initiative*, tracked over 5,000 adolescents aged 12 to 17. It revealed that the average teenager now spends upwards of seven hours a day on leisure screen time—excluding schoolwork. Crucially, the study found that adolescents who spent more than four hours a day on social media platforms were twice as likely to report symptoms of clinical depression compared to those who used screens for less than two hours.
“We are witnessing a profound shift in how youth socialize, and it is taking a toll on their psychological well-being,” said Dr. Elena Vasquez, the lead pediatrician of the study. “The issue isn’t just what teens are doing on their phones, but what they are *not* doing. Screen time is actively displacing critical developmental pillars: face-to-face socialization, physical exercise, and, most importantly, sleep.”
The study highlights the role of blue light and late-night notifications in disrupting adolescent circadian rhythms. Nearly 70 percent of teens surveyed admitted to keeping their smartphones in their bedrooms overnight, with many waking up to check notifications. Chronic sleep deprivation, researchers warn, is a direct catalyst for mood disorders.
Furthermore, the nature of social media algorithms is raising alarm bells. Features designed to maximize user engagement often expose vulnerable teens to curated, unrealistic lifestyles and cyberbullying, fostering feelings of inadequacy and isolation.
In response to these findings, a growing coalition of parents, educators, and lawmakers are calling for systemic action. Several school districts have implemented “bell-to-bell” cellphone bans, reporting immediate improvements in student interaction and classroom focus. Meanwhile, pediatricians are urging parents to establish "screen-free zones" at home, particularly during dinner and in the hour before bedtime.
“We don’t need to ban technology entirely,” Dr. Vasquez emphasized. “But we must teach adolescents digital literacy and boundaries. Just as we teach them about nutrition, we need to teach them how to consume digital media mindfully, before it consumes their mental health.”
Show the full input Show less
15 words (input 366)
**Digital Delusion: The Connection Between Too Much Screen Time and Today's Teen Mental Health Crisis**
- GPTZero0.82passed
- ZeroGPT1.00passed
- Originality.ai1.00passed
Passed 3 of 3 detectors. 2 of the 5 returned no verdict.
Every StealthBypass run in September 2026 →434 words (input 366)
The Digital Predicament: Rising Screen Time Fueling Teens’ Mental Health CrisisCHICAGO–A major new study is fueling a fresh national debate about youth screen time, finding a strong link between children and teen excessiveuse of digital devices and an increase in anxiety, depression and sleep disorders. The new report, released Tuesday by childhood research organizationHealthy MindsInitiative, followed more than 5,000 boys and girls between the ages of 12 and 17. And found that adolescents today are averaging sevenhours a day online playing video games, watching streaming services and posting on socialmedia, not counting hours they spend doing homework.
Moreover, the study found that teensthat spend more than four hours on social mediaplatforms are twice as likely to report symptoms of clinical depression as those that spend morethan twohours online, researchers say.“
This represents a massive shift in the way adolescents are interacting and socializ-ing, and we’re paying for it with their psychological health,” saidDr. Elena Vasquez, the lead pediatrician on the study.“ The key isn’t just what teens do with their phones, it’s what they aren’t doing. Spending hours of screen time actively deprivesthem of essential pillars of development: time with face to face friends; time spent playing outside; and the evermorecritical amount of sleep that children and teens require to stay mentally healthy,” she added.
Researchers are now finding the blue light emitted from digital screens also interfere with youth circadian cycles and sleep patterns.
Many teens admitted to having their smart phone on their bedside in overnight and many waking up in the night and checking their messages. Chronic sleep deprivation in teens can be “a strong predictor of depressive episodes,” researcher say. Beyond what’s lost, “the specific content teens are being exposed to on social networks,” including social-comparison–driven posts of people in their age bracket with unattainable lives-and cyber-bullying “appear to be a very specific and significant risk factor for both depression and poor self-esteem in teens,” say researchers.
Parental, educational and lawmaker efforts are growing in popularity to address this emerging crisis. Several school districts nationwide have now issued “bell-to-bell” cell phone bans, showing promising results in improved classroom engagement. Pediatricians are urging parents to develop “screen-free zones” throughout their homes, such as the dining table and an hour before bed.
“This is not about eliminating technology from our teens’ lives-rather, it’s about teaching them digital literacy and limitations,” said Dr.
Vasquez. “It is vital for us to teach teens to use digital technologies in a manner that they benefit them, but that does not harm their psychological health in the way nutrition and physicalactivity can positively help it,” she said.
Show the full output Show less
- GPTZero0.00caught
- Winston AI0.96passed
- ZeroGPT0.85passed
- Copyleaks1.00passed
- Originality.ai1.00passed
Passed 4 of 5 detectors.
Every Super Humanizer run in September 2026 →Each chip is one detector's score for that output, from 0 (AI) to 1 (human). A score of 0.50 or higher counts as a pass and shows green; below that the detector caught it and the chip shows red.
Questions people ask
Is StealthBypass better than Super Humanizer?
Super Humanizer finished 21.6 points ahead of StealthBypass in the September 2026 cycle, 60.97 to 39.38, ranking #11 against #13 in a field of 14. Super Humanizer scored higher on 1 of 5 detectors and 7 of 7 writing categories. Both tools ran the same 33 prompts, scored by the same 5 detectors, under methodology v1.2.0; every input, output and verdict is published.
Which bypasses AI detectors better, StealthBypass or Super Humanizer?
StealthBypass posted the higher bypass rate, 78.6 vs 64.4, and scored higher on 4 of 5 detectors. StealthBypass led on GPTZero, Copyleaks, Winston AI and ZeroGPT; Super Humanizer led on Originality.ai. The overall bypass gap is inside both 95% confidence intervals, so it is not a reliable difference.
Do StealthBypass and Super Humanizer keep the original meaning?
Super Humanizer preserved meaning better, 74.2 vs 39.5 on our 0–100 similarity scale. On readability, StealthBypass rated higher, 54.1 vs 52.1. Penalties this cycle: StealthBypass −23.0, Super Humanizer −5.0.