AI can generate the visible sentences of a book or article, and a detector may try to classify that surface.
But the finished text reveals almost nothing about the discarded paths behind it: the questions that were reframed, arguments that were rejected, claims that were narrowed, alternatives that were compared, and the final decision that something was ready to publish.
That distinction changes how I think about authorship in human-AI work. The relevant question is not simply who produced the words. It is who governed the trajectory from possibility to commitment. AI can widen the space of possible texts; human judgment can determine which path survives, what can responsibly be claimed, and who accepts responsibility for the result.
In that sense, the deepest part of authorship may be invisible in the final artifact, yet decisive to why that artifact exists in its published form.
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/when-facts-agree-decisions-diverge-rogerio-figurelli-uxbif