This AI Tool Does Literature Reviews in SECONDS (100x faster than you)

[@ingowinkler1168]

Another very interesting tool. Given the Nummer of tools you suggested on your channel, I wonder when you start talking about resonsible use of AI in academia.

[@farzadjahanfard]

I love him and owe him a lot, but now he is milking the AI and tools to get the views. There has been no helpful Content in the last four months, but his old stuff is a goldmine.

[@glenyoung1337]

How does the tool compare to the others on the market (Elicit, Perplexity, Consensus, Afforai, etc.)? Would love a video comparing the products and highlighting the strengths/weaknesses of each. Which one is the best?

[@khaledalazab5144]

you searched alot, what is your input please?

[@glenyoung1337]

@@khaledalazab5144 Perplexity is best for general search queries and real-time information needs with concise, direct answers. Consensus is ideal for researchers seeking quick, synthesized answers and a clear understanding of consensus in the literature. Elicit is best suited for those requiring comprehensive literature reviews, detailed data extraction, and a highly customizable research review experience. I haven't used Afforai or other products enough to form an opinion.

[@immanuelg1]

It looks a lot like SciSpace where you can ask a question in natural language and it will display 5-10 top papers and then you can display dozens more. And you can chat with the paper. You can upload papers as well. Etc. And of course SciSpace is available as a GPT in Chatgpt so it's integrated with all your other chats...

[@brandenborn9510]

Andy, your stuff is amazing and your enthusiasm for teaching is contagious. Thank you for helping people understand the opportunities provided by such AI tools. As a faculty member, I very much appreciate your regular comments that people ultimately also need to actually *read the text* to hold the knowledge for themselves. I'm a bit amazed and equally skeeved out seeing the generative capabilities, though again, thanks for being explicit about not using that as original work. What are your thoughts on the ever-moving gray line between such AI generated text and original text? I think once people have such detailed text it's hard to just rework it into their own voice.

[@Foodieme610]

Thanks for sharing such a wonderful tool.....am going to use it for my project work...

[@OliveirosDiasJr]

Hi Andy, great job! I am learning a lot with you. I realized that you research about photovoltaic systems/materials. A long time ago, 90's, I was studying photovoltaic systems, and one of my references was Dr. Martin Green, and his book Solar Cells, he was from Australia as you. So if you allow me, I can call you a "friend". Thank you a lot. And, if someday I go to Australia, I will search for you. 🙏

[@uxormenlac]

Very useful tool, like a weapon of mass destruction; press the button and be done with it... I think that the only real value of this kind of tool is to show how a literature review should not be done. The purpose of the LR is to establish the foundation for the researcher's original work therefore it is mainly intended for the researcher to figure out what has been previously done in their chosen field of research. It should be a methodical process of searching, reading and writing to become acquainted with the matter and consolidate the knowledge through the process of writing.

[@rudicerny]

👋perfect! I like your enthusiasm. Your vlogs are a very good source for orientation in this explisively growing area!

[@rutger4131]

I'm afraid that the amount of b.s. that's going to be published in the coming years is just as worrying as how worringly good this is. It's already happening but it will scale up. The REAL challenge in academia in the future will be finding papers that are actually of value.

[@stuartedwards3622]

Plenty of bs published in academia at the moment and finding papers of value can currently be a challenge 😂

[@CaptZenPetabyte]

Recently completed a Masters (here in Australia) and frequently the marking was released late as people had turned in nearly 100% AI research reports?!

[@AnswerThisio]

I believe it's crucial to educate students to view these tools as resources rather than just means to complete their projects. Much like a hammer can be used for both good and bad, AI carries the same potential. While we may witness remarkable publications in the future thanks to improved access to literature and enhanced writing capabilities, it's equally important to prioritize responsibility in their use.

[@PostImperfect]

​@@CaptZenPetabytethat sounds really frustrating. Part of the issue will require different types of assessment questions, so it's up to those setting assessments too

[@benjaminleroy9053]

​@@AnswerThisioAnd that's exactly why you add functionalities like "humanize text" that do nothing but encourage misuse. How cynical. You know you are better off the more people pay for your service to skip assignments or publish bullshit literature reviews.

[@AnswerThisio]

Entertaining and great overview of our tool, Andy! We're all about helping researchers save time without sacrificing quality. Glad to see AnswerThis fitting right into your workflow. We’ve built the tool entirely around what researchers need, and we're always open to feedback as we continue to roll out new updates. If anyone has questions or thoughts, don’t hesitate to let us know!

[@surbhi675]

Hi, Please provide one month free for students (institutional ID login) to make a decision whether we should invest and have a monthly subscription. Every researcher’s research is different. Even if Andy is walking us through the user interface but still research like mine is multidisciplinary.

[@shawnershorts]

Thanks Dr Andy, very efficient. Used it to strengthen a lit review for a paper that I have to revise and it even referenced a preprint that I have on the topic lol. Nice. Just have to validate the references because it doesn't reliably give DOIs on all in the reference list.

[@drfranke]

Andy, great tool, but the free plan doesn't offer the papers. The good thing is there is a discount for educators with an EDU email.

[@Seanchai_Tostach]

The etymology of the word passion lies in the concept of suffering. So maybe it's not entirely far off the mark?

[@damanrique]

Between this one and Elicit, what will be your choice for literature review if your buget just allow you one of them?

[@AnswerThisio]

It has to be AnswerThis 😁

[@williamcattr267]

Will the output pass an AI detection tool? What about plagiarism checks?

[@lifeprinciplespodcast]

Andy, Salam. Thanks. You are amazing and making our lives so much easier. Thanks. Just a question. Is this now your favourite tool? Or you're still recimandung others?

[@AnswerThisio]

Andy should choose his next words wisely! 😂

[@tulioeguez4228]

Hi, which one do you think is better for summaries of qualitative data, SciSpace or answethis ai? Thanks!

[@vik6986]

Great video as always. Please review Romo AI. Worth buying or not

[@PRITIYADAV-u8n]

Hi, do you have any suggestions on reading literature review papers quickly and efficiently?

[@nab5035]

remove distractions + have a plan (know what you are looking for in a paper)

[@ahmedamin3429]

Hi Dr. Great tool, we always expect you to come up with great things. Thank you very much. What bout plagiarism?

[@sersomeone9704]

For finding papers, which one do you think is better? This tool, or Scispace?

[@AbhishekSrivastava-g6o]

Is it doing literature review or generating literature review ?

[@kieranhanrahan2883]

Hi Andy, love your videos. I did a test on this in respect of a qualitative research heavy domain and the results were not good (that's me being very diplomatic).... it found just 4 cited articles over a specified 24 year period. Having studied the area, I know of around 40 papers, national plans, and other key documents that it should have found. I'll keep playing with it, but all these tools are only as good as the databases they are searching...

[@AnswerThisio]

Hello! Thank you for your feedback. I’d love to review the answer we provided and work on improving its accuracy. Please feel free to share any additional feedback on the site, and I’ll follow up with an email shortly to connect with you. I apologize for your experience; I assure you this is not typical of what our users usually encounter

[@ryancormack6934]

​@@AnswerThisioWhich databases are avavilable to this AI? If it is only open source English language journals, I would imagine there would be large and significant gaps in knowledge.

[@kieranhanrahan2883]

@@AnswerThisio no problem. I uses the app to look at corporate social responsibility (now ESG) practice since 2000 in a European country. It gave me four citations and two were marginal. The app looks great, like the functionality, but as with all these platforms, you are only as good as the databases you are searching. You should also consider publishing these source databases, otherwise reliance on your tool becomes a source of unknown bias in literature reviews (like any other app). Hope this helps. K

[@amartripathy]

If I have CHATGPT Plus in oaid form, do I need to pay again here?

[@Foodieme610]

Chatgpt won't give you answers with evidences.. Here you get in-line-citations and reference list

[@username42]

thanks for the video after watching this , it is 100% clear that not worthy for 22 USD at all :D

[@KN-tx7sd]

the web site is working now.

[@umoz8201]

Seems up for me

[@Foodieme610]

It's working ... New updates... Quite interesting

[@njoroon8440]

How do AI generated writeups fair with plagiarism? AI in research isn't bad at all. It just makes work lots easier. It all depends on how one uses it. It's akin to a mathematical calculator versus manual calculations. With the search engines, one can search for the bible. With the same, one can search for adult sites.

[@neilmcbride8945]

So who’s going to be left to read this proliferation of AI generated literature reviews?

[@SSStoriesworld]

Hello from Bangladesh. Thanks for the vedio.

[@EddaFredericks]

specswriter AI fixes this. AI tool accelerates literature reviews.

[@nab5035]

that random tangent about researchers being bad kissers😂😂😂😂 i love it, can disagree though

[@sam66658]

Every video you change your mind to a new tools we got confused

[@lifeprinciplespodcast]

Because each time a newer tool is coming to the market

[@user-cz2kn2nb9r]

I like the topic. The narrator is all over to the place where the review is incomprehensible. Get organized. Get professional. Stop with the cutsie crap. We are here for facts and information and not to have a yuk.

[@VladyslavKL]

🕊

[@squib3083]

As of 2024, any AI assisted writing will generate crap.

[@organisedme]

no idea where we are heading Dr. buy another chair😇

[@internationalall-roundfavours]

Much as technological advancement is revolutionizing life, what is at stake is the unethical use of AI tools. The critical question is this; who and what becomes of a Researcher who relies on a machine generated ideas ? This raises concern on the value of knowledge. Far from the possibility of detection, humanity must act responsibly. Unethical use of ai in research, equals a journey to the unknown

[@jecabarbosa76]

Reddit ❤

[@mohsinaziz2000]

Wow! Your doing a great job for lazy researchers ...lolx