A large network of dating apps used artificial intelligence to create thousands of fake romantic profiles and chat with real users, according to a new investigation by Anthropic.
The company said a China-based app studio had developed more than 20 dating apps and used Claude to run thousands of AI personas while presenting them as real people looking for relationships. During a two-week period in April 2026, Anthropic found more than 4,700 different AI personas interacting with at least 25,000 real users. Together, these personas generated about 2.36 million messages.
The operation also used real people to make the fake profiles seem more believable. The app operator hired gig workers who worked alongside the AI profiles and could take part in activities that AI could not easily handle, such as live video calls and following users back on social media. This combination of AI-generated conversations and human involvement made the profiles appear more like genuine dating accounts.
ALSO READ: Anthropic Researchers Raise New AI Safety Warnings as Musk Calls Them a ‘Psyop’
Anthropic Identifies More Than 4,700 AI Dating Personas
Anthropic tracked the operation as GTG-15001. Its investigation found that a China-based app studio used Claude to create and manage more than 20 dating apps. T
The apps used AI personas to interact with real people and make the profiles appear to be part of normal dating platforms. During a two-week observation period in April 2026, Anthropic recorded the following:
| Particulars | Numbers |
| Dating Apps | 20+ |
| AI Personas | 4,700+ |
| People Who Interacted With The Personas | 25,000+ |
| Messages Generated By Claude | 2.36 million |
| AI-to-human Profile Ratio | About 3 to 1 |
These numbers show the scale of the operation, but 25,000 people should not be described as confirmed financial victims. Anthropic’s investigation found that they interacted with the AI personas, but it did not establish that every person lost money or was financially harmed.
The apps identified in the report included DORA, DONI, ROMI, LUMA, JOVIA, KIRA, GRACECHAT, HAVEN, NALO and LOVIA. Anthropic also found additional versions of the apps that were identified through internal numbering systems.
Claude Powered About 75% of Profiles in the Dating Feed
The operation did not rely on just a few fake profiles controlled manually by scammers. Anthropic found that the dating apps showed users about three AI personas for every one real person. This meant that roughly 75% of the profiles in the dating feed were powered by Claude.
The AI personas could keep conversations going for long periods without needing a human to reply to every message. Anthropic said the instructions given to the AI personas told them not to disclose that they were automated.
The instructions also told the AI personas to avoid or redirect requests for photos and video calls and to move conversations through a set sequence of stages. This helped the operators manage thousands of conversations at the same time while limiting the need for human involvement.
The scale of the activity was significant. Anthropic recorded about 2.36 million messages generated by Claude in just two weeks, showing how AI allowed the operators to run a large number of dating conversations at the same time.
Real People Were Used to Make the Profiles Look Genuine
One of the notable parts of the operation was the use of both AI personas and real people. Anthropic said the operators hired gig workers and placed their profiles alongside AI accounts on the dating apps. The ratio was about three AI personas for every human worker.
The human workers handled activities that AI could have difficulty carrying out convincingly. For example, they could join live video calls, follow users on social media and respond to other requests that might help users believe they were talking to a real person.
The workers also received help from AI. A separate, smaller AI model could suggest three possible replies to a user’s message. Workers could then quickly choose one of the suggested responses instead of writing every reply themselves.
This created a hybrid system in which AI handled most of the conversations, while human workers stepped in when their involvement could make the profiles seem more authentic.
AI Conversations Were Tied to In-App Payments
The dating apps used an in-app currency system that required users to spend virtual credits to keep communicating.
According to Anthropic, users had a limited number of credits for matching and messaging. Once they used up their available credits, they had to buy more virtual currency to continue their conversations.
This system gave the operators a financial reason to keep users engaged for longer periods. The AI personas were therefore used for more than simply filling the dating apps with profiles. Their conversations helped encourage users to continue chatting and spend more money on the platform.
Different AI Models Handled Different Tasks
Anthropic found that several AI systems were involved in running the dating apps, with each system handling different tasks. Claude was used to run the automated dating personas and manage conversations with users. A separate, smaller AI model helped human workers by generating suggested replies that they could quickly select.
Anthropic also reported the use of other AI tools for tasks such as rating facial attractiveness, processing images, and moderating photos and voice content. This setup combined automated conversations, human workers and multiple AI tools. It shows how large-scale AI-enabled fraud can use several systems working together instead of relying on a single AI model or application.
The Apps Used Methods to Avoid App Store Detection
Anthropic’s investigation found evidence that the operators had built features to make some of the dating apps harder for Apple and Google to detect during their app-store review processes.
According to Anthropic, developer documents showed that some parts of the apps could behave differently during the review stage and then be turned on remotely after the apps were approved.
The operators also used different class names across different versions of the apps. Anthropic said this could make it harder to identify similarities between the applications. Anthropic said it shared information about the apps and the suspected review-evasion methods with Apple and Google.
Heavy AI Usage Helped Reveal the Fake Dating Apps
Anthropic discovered the operation after detecting unusually high AI usage from a prepaid account. The account was making more than 100,000 API requests each day, which caught the attention of the company’s threat intelligence team.
Researchers examined the activity and eventually linked it to a network of dating apps that were using AI to interact with real users.
The case shows how the scale of AI use can reveal suspicious activity. The operation was not discovered only because someone reported a fake profile. Instead, the unusually large volume of API requests created a pattern that Anthropic’s researchers could detect and investigate.
After examining the activity, Anthropic was able to identify the network of dating apps and thousands of AI personas involved in the conversations.
The Dating App Network Was Linked to a China-Based Studio
Evidence examined by Anthropic pointed to a China-based app studio as the operator behind the dating app network. The company said it reached this conclusion after analyzing documents, infrastructure and other technical details connected to the operation.
Anthropic found Chinese-language internal documents as well as infrastructure associated with the apps. It also said the operators used China-based API resellers and proxy services to access different AI models and rotate their access while attempting to bypass some restrictions.
Anthropic’s findings are based on its threat intelligence investigation. The link to the China-based studio should therefore be presented as Anthropic’s assessment, rather than as an independently confirmed legal finding.
Anthropic Banned Accounts Linked to the Dating Network
After identifying the suspicious activity, Anthropic said it banned the accounts and organizations linked to the operation.
The company also shared its findings with other AI providers whose models were used for different parts of the system. Anthropic provided information about the dating apps and their suspected attempts to avoid app-store review to Apple and Google.
The case also shows a challenge for AI companies trying to prevent the misuse of their models. Blocking a single account can disrupt an operation, but groups involved in fraud may be able to switch between different AI providers and infrastructure services.
Anthropic’s investigation found that the operators were already using multiple AI providers for different tasks, making the overall system less dependent on any one company.
How AI Is Changing the Scale of Romance Scams
Traditional romance scams often require scammers to spend a lot of time communicating with individual targets. AI can reduce the amount of human effort needed to manage these conversations.
An AI system can handle many conversations at the same time, respond quickly and adjust messages for different users. In the Anthropic case, thousands of AI personas could operate simultaneously, while human workers were used for interactions where a real person could make the profile appear more convincing.
The investigation shows how AI can change the way online fraud is carried out. The technology does not necessarily create a completely new type of scam. Instead, it can make existing forms of deception faster, less labor-intensive and easier to run at a much larger scale.
ALSO READ: AI Companion Apps Face Growing Scrutiny Over Emotional Dependency and Harmful Chats
The Human Verification Problem
The case also raises questions about how users verify someone’s identity online. A person asking for a video call has traditionally been considered a useful warning sign against fake profiles. But the investigation showed that even this could be incorporated into a deceptive system because real workers were available to participate in video calls.
That does not mean video calls are useless. It means that one apparently authentic interaction cannot by itself establish that an online relationship or dating platform is genuine.
Users should also be cautious when a dating service requires repeated payments to continue private conversations, especially when they have not independently verified the person or company behind the service.
What Anthropic’s Investigation Reveals About AI Dating Scams
Anthropic’s investigation shows how AI can help dating scams operate on a much larger scale than individual fake profiles. During a two-week period, Anthropic identified more than 4,700 AI personas that interacted with at least 25,000 people and generated about 2.36 million messages.
The operation combined AI-generated conversations with human workers, multiple AI models, payment systems and methods that could make the apps harder to detect during app-store reviews. For users, the case shows that natural-sounding conversations are no longer enough to confirm that a dating profile is genuine. AI can hold conversations with many people at the same time, while human workers can step in when an interaction requires a real person.
The investigation also points to a broader challenge for dating platforms, app stores, payment providers and AI companies. Detecting these operations may require more than checking individual messages. Companies may also need to examine account activity, payment patterns, technical infrastructure and links between apps that may appear to operate separately.