Okay, let's cut to the chase: No, CNKI itself won't direct­ly detect if you've used AI to pol­ish your the­sis. But – and this is a big "but" – there are some nuances to con­sid­er. Let me break it down for you in a way that's easy to digest, no aca­d­e­m­ic jar­gon, I promise.

Think of CNKI (Chi­na Nation­al Knowl­edge Infra­struc­ture) like a colos­sal library. It's a vast repos­i­to­ry, a dig­i­tal trea­sure trove of aca­d­e­m­ic papers, jour­nals, dis­ser­ta­tions, and con­fer­ence pro­ceed­ings, pri­mar­i­ly from Chi­na. It's the go-to place for researchers in Chi­na to check for pla­gia­rism and to see what's already been pub­lished in their field. It's a super impor­tant resource.

Now, your ques­tion is about whether this dig­i­tal librar­i­an will some­how mag­i­cal­ly know you used an AI tool to spruce up your writ­ing. The short answer is, in its capac­i­ty as a data­base, it won't. CNKI's pri­ma­ry func­tion is to index and com­pare con­tent. It scans sub­mit­ted papers and com­pares them against its mas­sive data­base to flag poten­tial instances of pla­gia­rism – where text is sus­pi­cious­ly sim­i­lar to exist­ing pub­li­ca­tions.

AI pol­ish­ing tools, on the oth­er hand, are designed to improve your exist­ing writ­ing, not to cre­ate entire­ly new con­tent from scratch. They help with things like:

• Gram­mar and Spelling: Fix­ing those pesky typos and gram­mat­i­cal errors that can make your writ­ing look slop­py.
• Clar­i­ty and Con­cise­ness: Mak­ing your sen­tences flow bet­ter and ensur­ing your ideas are expressed clear­ly and direct­ly.
• Style and Tone: Adjust­ing the over­all feel of your writ­ing to match the expect­ed aca­d­e­m­ic stan­dards (for­mal, objec­tive, etc.).
• Vocab­u­lary Enhance­ment: Sug­gest­ing stronger or more pre­cise word choic­es to make your argu­ments more com­pelling.
• Struc­ture improve­ments.

These AI tools essen­tial­ly act like a super-pow­ered edi­tor, help­ing you refine your own ideas and words. They're not (or at least shouldn't be) gen­er­at­ing entire­ly new para­graphs or sec­tions based on oth­er sources. That is the key dif­fer­ence.

So, if you're using an AI tool respon­si­bly – to pol­ish your orig­i­nal work – CNKI's pla­gia­rism detec­tion sys­tem isn't going to be trig­gered sim­ply because your writ­ing is gram­mat­i­cal­ly cor­rect, well-struc­­tured, and uses sophis­ti­cat­ed vocab­u­lary. The sys­tem is look­ing for sub­stan­tial tex­tu­al over­lap with exist­ing sources, not for signs of good writ­ing.

How­ev­er, (Here Comes the "But…")

While CNKI itself won't flag AI pol­ish­ing, there are some indi­rect ways your use of AI could become an issue, although these are edge cas­es and main­ly relate to aca­d­e­m­ic integri­ty poli­cies rather than CNKI's spe­cif­ic func­tion­al­i­ty:

1. Over-Reliance on AI and Uno­rig­i­nal Con­tent: If you become too reliant on the AI tool, and it starts sig­nif­i­cant­ly alter­ing the sub­stance of your work, rather than just the style, you're ven­tur­ing into dan­ger­ous ter­ri­to­ry. If the AI is essen­tial­ly rewrit­ing large chunks of your the­sis, intro­duc­ing ideas or phras­ing that aren't tru­ly your own, then you're no longer sub­mit­ting your work. This could poten­tial­ly lead to issues with pla­gia­rism detec­tion if the AI pulls heav­i­ly from exist­ing sources, even if it para­phras­es them. It could also raise con­cerns about aca­d­e­m­ic dis­hon­esty if your insti­tu­tion has spe­cif­ic poli­cies about AI use.
2. Data Secu­ri­ty and Pri­va­cy Con­cerns: This is the point made in your ref­er­ence mate­r­i­al. The issue isn't CNKI find­ing out; it's about the AI tool provider. Rep­utable AI pol­ish­ing ser­vices will have strong data pri­va­cy poli­cies, ensur­ing your the­sis remains con­fi­den­tial. How­ev­er, if you use a less rep­utable ser­vice, there's a the­o­ret­i­cal risk of your data being leaked or mis­used. This isn't CNKI's doing, but it's a risk asso­ci­at­ed with using any third-par­­ty ser­vice. Always check the pri­va­cy pol­i­cy and terms of ser­vice before upload­ing your the­sis. Opt for well-known, estab­lished com­pa­nies with a good track record.
3. Insti­tu­tion­al Poli­cies: Your uni­ver­si­ty or insti­tu­tion might have spe­cif­ic guide­lines or poli­cies regard­ing the use of AI tools in aca­d­e­m­ic writ­ing. Some insti­tu­tions might be per­fect­ly fine with it, while oth­ers might have restric­tions or require dis­clo­sure. It's cru­cial to check your institution's poli­cies before using any AI tools. If your pro­fes­sor or depart­ment has a strict "no AI" rule, and they some­how dis­cov­er you used one (even just for pol­ish­ing), you could face aca­d­e­m­ic con­se­quences, not from CNKI, but from your insti­tu­tion. This is less about detec­tion and more about adher­ence to rules.
4. Mis­use of AI-gen­er­at­ed con­tent.

How to Use AI Pol­ish­ing Tools Respon­si­bly:

• Pri­or­i­tize Orig­i­nal Thought: Always start with your own ideas, research, and writ­ing. The AI tool should be a sup­ple­ment, not a sub­sti­tute, for your own intel­lec­tu­al effort.
• Review and Edit Care­ful­ly: Don't blind­ly accept every sug­ges­tion the AI tool makes. Crit­i­cal­ly review the changes and ensure they accu­rate­ly reflect your intend­ed mean­ing and main­tain your aca­d­e­m­ic voice.
• Focus on Improve­ment, Not Per­fec­tion: The goal is to enhance your writ­ing, not to make it flaw­less. A few minor imper­fec­tions are per­fect­ly nat­ur­al, and striv­ing for unat­tain­able per­fec­tion can lead to over-reliance on the AI.
• Under­stand the Tool's Lim­i­ta­tions: AI pol­ish­ing tools are good at iden­ti­fy­ing gram­mat­i­cal errors and sug­gest­ing styl­is­tic improve­ments, but they don't under­stand the sub­stance of your research. They can't fact-check your claims, eval­u­ate your argu­ments, or ensure the over­all coher­ence of your the­sis. That's your job.
• Be Trans­par­ent if Required:If your are required to, make sure to dis­close.

In essence, think of AI pol­ish­ing tools like a real­ly good spell check­er and gram­mar guru com­bined with a sophis­ti­cat­ed the­saurus. They're there to help you present your own work in the best pos­si­ble light, not to do the work for you. Used wise­ly, they can be valu­able assets in your aca­d­e­m­ic jour­ney. Used care­less­ly, they can cre­ate prob­lems. The pow­er, and the respon­si­bil­i­ty, is ulti­mate­ly in your hands.