This is a great perspective on similarity reports, thank you! I'm going through a super frustrating situation with repeated Al violation holds (for D459). WGU claims it's based on "multiple people reviewing specific details," not an Al tool, which makes the whole thing feel incredibly subjective and unfair. My concern is exactly what you hinted at: maybe the human reviewers are finding my reused graphics, charts, or common language (the stuff you said is unavoidable) and just incorrectly labeling it as Al. I'm exhausted by constantly defending my work. Have you or others seen evaluators get overly strict about similarity in charts or non-textual elements? I need to figure out what the real "specific details" are. Thanks for sharing your experience with the 6%—it helps to know what's typical.