Academic papers shouldn't read like mystery novels or vague, pointless ramblings. If the abstract doesn't describe or summarize any notable results or contribut

Academic papers shouldn't read like mystery novels or vague, pointless ramblings. If the abstract doesn't describe or summarize any notable results or contributions, a reader might (very reasonably) assume that there aren't any. The last line of the abstract does seem to be relevant: > This work consists on (sic) an attempt to describe in a concise way the main models are (sic) sectors that are affected by generative AI and to provide a taxonomy of the main generative models published recently. I think the authors may have meant something like: "This work presents a concise overview of generative AI models and their application areas, and provides a taxonomy of recently published generative models." They could have gone on to explain that the models are categorized by input and output type.