Hello everyone, welcome back to my blog! Today, I’ll be sharing the different features of several AI tools when it comes to research. Let’s get started.

 

1. Perplexity

When I tried using Perplexity to research “What are the main challenges for women’s rights in Egypt today?” I was honestly impressed with how effective it was. It didn’t just give me general information—it gathered several aspects of women’s rights (six topics), backed each one up with specific research papers, and even provided direct citations. When I opened the papers, the exact references were there, which made me trust the tool even more. Also, when I asked for a summary of a specific source, it summarized it effectively, listing the key data in it.

What stood out to me was how much easier it made my research. Finding solid academic sources on topics related to Egypt can be challenging when searching on my own, but Perplexity gathered multiple accurate citations in one place. If I had known about this tool during my RHET classes, it would have saved me so much time and made my research stronger.

Pros:

  • It immediately gathers research sources and supports its findings without having to ask for them.
  • Accurate and credible sources.
  • It provides an analysis of the sources.
  • Effective summaries of key takeaways and statistics in a source.

These 2 images show the accuracy of the sources.

This image shows the specific summary of the source.

2. ChatGPT

When I researched the topic of “What are the main challenges for women’s rights in Egypt today?” using ChatGPT, I found that it provided a limited scope, covering only five topics under the umbrella of human rights. As I evaluated the credibility of its sources, I initially found one correct citation. However, as I continued my review, I noticed that it referenced Wikipedia, which is not a credible source for academic research. Additionally, it listed Wikipedia as a source without actually using any information from it. Another major issue was that it cited an incorrect statistic from a 2013 UN report. When I reviewed the original report, I found no evidence of the statistics mentioned. Overall, I do not believe ChatGPT is an effective tool for research, as it relies on weak sources and sometimes provides inaccurate information. Also, when I asked for a summary of a specific source, the summary was too general and didn’t provide specific key information about the source.

Pros:

  • It’s fast and gives you a quick overview of a topic.
  • It’s great for brainstorming ideas.

Cons:

  • It sometimes pulls from unreliable sources like Wikipedia.
  • Some facts or statistics might be inaccurate or even completely made up.
  • The citations it provides can be outdated or misrepresented.
  • General summaries.

This image shows inaccurate information not relevant to the source.

This image shows that ChatGPT uses Wikipedia to reference 

General Summary 

3.DeepSeek

When using DeepSeek, I followed the same initial step of entering my research question: “What are the main challenges for women’s rights in Egypt today?” However, unlike Perplexity, DeepSeek did not automatically provide sources. Instead, it generated a list of several subtopics related to the question and briefly discussed each one. When I requested sources to support the information, it did not provide direct links as ChatGPT and Perplexity do. Instead, it summarized information from various sources without offering clickable references. When I specifically asked for source links, DeepSeek stated that it could not provide direct links, meaning I had to search for them manually. Additionally, it did not offer direct citations from the sources but rather discussed them in general terms. On the positive side, however, all the sources it referenced were credible, including organizations like UN Women, the World Bank, and UNICEF. As for summaries, it stated that it provides general summaries about the source without specific data because it can’t access it.

Pros:

  • References credible sources.

Cons:

  • Does not provide direct citations or clickable links.
  • Requires manual searching for sources.
  • General summaries.

Provides a simple summary

Doesn’t directly cite 

 

Doesn’t provide clickable links to sources

4. Connected Papers

I tried using Connected Papers, but it was really hard to understand. When I first entered my topic, it said there were no relevant papers, which was frustrating. The way the papers were linked didn’t make sense to me, and the graph was confusing with too many things to look at. When I clicked on different circles in the graph, it only showed the abstracts of various papers. I also found that it didn’t directly provide citations, which made it less useful. It seems to be more helpful for finding different abstracts rather than giving clear references.

Pros:

  • It helps discover related research papers that might not appear in a simple search.
  • The visual graph provides an interesting way to explore connections between papers.
  • It can be useful for getting an overview of a research topic and finding new sources.

Cons:

  • It can be confusing and difficult to navigate.
  • The connections between papers aren’t always clear.
  • It doesn’t provide direct citations, which makes it less useful for referencing.
  • It sometimes doesn’t find relevant papers, even for common topics.

 

 First, it didn’t find papers

 

Complicated Graph

That’s all for today! I hope this helped you understand the different features of AI tools for research and the pros and cons of each. See you in the next BLOG!!