They may have had a disclaimer, but they also presented it as a tool to help one summarize research. It was clearly unreliable there. And who cares if it has so

They may have had a disclaimer, but they also presented it as a tool to help one summarize research. It was clearly unreliable there. And who cares if it has some good results? How do you know whether it's spitting nonsense* or accurate information? Yes, I do think there is value in engaging with the community for models that aren't perfect. But it needs more work before it can be framed as useful tool for scientific research. * I mean subtle nonsense. Space bears are easy to distinguish..but what if the errors aren't as 'crazy'?