It depends, I had some interviews like this that I suspected. For context, most of the interviews I conduct are technical design related where we have a discussion, less coding. So in those it is quite open ended where we will go, and there are many reasonable solutions.

In those cases where I’ve seen that level of performance, there have been (one or more of):

- Audio/video glitches.

- candidate pausing frequently after each question, no words, then sudden clarity and fluency on the problem.

- candidate often suggests multiple specific ideas/points to each question I ask.

- I can often see their eyes reading back and forth (note; if you use AI in an interview, maybe dont use a 4K webcam).

- way too much specificity when I didn’t ask for it. For example, the topic of profiling a go application came up, and the candidate suggested we use go tool pprof and suggested a few specific arguments that weren’t relevant, later I found in the documentation the same exact example commands verbatim.

In all, the impression I come away with in those types of interviews is that they performed “too well” in an uncanny way.

I worked for AWS for a long time and did a couple hundred interviews there, the best candidates I interviewed were distinctly different in how they solved problems, how they communicated, in ways that reading from an llm response can’t resemble.