> I dislike this style of "searching" That's because you are using a tool that is not made to be a search engine interface: there is no "type keywords here to

> I dislike this style of "searching" That's because you are using a tool that is not made to be a search engine interface: there is no "type keywords here to get links to web pages". The field is "what would you reply to this" - very much not the same. If you shouted "RFC 1234" or "Declaration of Independence" or "Walt Withman collected page 3" to a guy in the street, he would not reply with a reference to find the documents, directions as if you shouted "Fifth street towards the end" (and even then). Perplexity is there to give you the references on which it decided to build the reply. > The URL is invalid The one I received was perfect. Stochastics. > the reference became part of the URL Given the format of the return you pasted, it looks more like the NN encoded a figment merging the URL and a "footnote anchor". It may or may not be so, but we could keep the suspect of that class of possibilities alive.