Edit: I should say that I think a much more applicable use-case for something like this is passing in N papers and asking for synthesis, or to eliminate N-1, se

Edit: I should say that I think a much more applicable use-case for something like this is passing in N papers and asking for synthesis, or to eliminate N-1, select the most relevant to a query, etc etc. what I am reacting to below is just the idea of asking for a summary of a single paper. - Maybe this is an aloof response, but I guess I struggle to see how this ”tool” (putting that in quotes because it is just a DAG of prompts, which doesn’t quite rise to the level of ”tool” to me) actually helps someone as a researcher. It seems like reading the title of a paper, the abstract and skimming the paper are such fundamental skills and not taking the small amount of time to do that yourself just makes you less effective as a researcher? I guess I can see the output of a graph like this being vaguely useful in terms of generating metadata for paper indexes and so on but piping the output to a human? Just seems like extra steps and not much time saved to me compared to reading with your own eyes. Being able to process knowledge quickly will always be important, but I feel like this (or other similar summarization methods) would not actually help you do it quicker in a meaningful way, and in fact makes you slower at doing it on your own if you really come to solely rely on it. Maybe I’m just being a boomer here (despite being about 30…)