One bot in your panel poisons every insight downstream — and with AI agents that write plausible open-ended answers, spotting fakes by reading responses no longer works. useHUMA verifies the respondent, not the response: behavioral signals confirm a real person was present, without collecting any personal data that would worry an ethics board.
LLM-driven agents complete surveys with coherent, human-sounding answers that attention checks no longer catch.
Incentive farming
Paid panels attract scripted farms that harvest rewards at scale, drowning real participants.
Compromised datasets
One contaminated wave forces re-fielding studies — burning budget and timelines, or worse, shipping decisions built on bot data.
How useHUMA fixes it
Drop the script tag or SDK into your survey page — signals collect passively while the participant answers normally.
Verify at submission with one API call and attach the confidence score to each response for filtering or weighting.
Zero PII by architecture: only statistical behavior aggregates are stored, which keeps consent language simple.
Frequently asked
Won't verification bias my sample?
Less than CAPTCHAs do. There's no puzzle, no friction and no extra step for participants — completion rates stay intact while non-human responses get flagged before they reach your dataset.
Is this compatible with research ethics and consent requirements?
useHUMA stores no PII — no names, no contents of what was typed, only statistical aggregates of interaction patterns. Most teams cover it with one line in their existing data-quality disclosure.
Can I filter responses by humanity score afterwards?
Yes. Attach the returned confidence score to each submission and set your own threshold — keep, weight or discard responses based on it.
One API call. Zero puzzles for humans.
14-day free trial · full API access · no credit card.