3 ms·
>I've also been using Perplexity.ai and I would say it hits a sweet spot and is impressive. It's essentially a RAG-based search engine that's fast and snappy an
by mrkramer 3y ago
>I've also been using Perplexity.ai and I would say it hits a sweet spot and is impressive. It's essentially a RAG-based search engine that's fast and snappy and it works much better than Bing or ChatGPT Bing. Because it's primarily RAG driven, the content is primarily external and you get links to original sources so you can verify the answer. This means the level of hallucination is lower than foundational models.
That is what worries me about the Google Bard; it rarely gives references to its answers so I'm not sure if I can trust it or not but you can double check the answer by Google Bard searching it on Google Search and then giving you the source and its textual reference.
- wenc 3y agoWhere do you find the references from Bard? There is the G button that you click after the answer appears which double-checks the result, but it only underlines parts of the answer that show it was or wasn't able to corroborate with search results. It doesn't seem to provide links to the relevant results themselves. Whereas wiht Perplexity, the links are part of the answer.
- mrkramer 3y agoG Double check button only gives one reference(at least in my examples) but it seems like Bard does not give references by design[1][2]. Websites are kinda getting ripped off, because Google is not referencing them and giving them exposure and traffic. But Bard is still in the experimental phase so I hope that will change. [1] https://searchengineland.com/google-explains-why-bard-rarely-lists-citations-and-links-to-content-creators-394635 https://searchengineland.com/google-explains-why-bard-rarely... [2] https://www.seroundtable.com/google-bard-wont-link-to-sources-too-often-35097.html https://www.seroundtable.com/google-bard-wont-link-to-source...