She's a scientist. In that area LLMs are quite useful in my opinion and part of my daily workflow. Quick scripts that use APIs to get data, cleaning the data an

She's a scientist. In that area LLMs are quite useful in my opinion and part of my daily workflow. Quick scripts that use APIs to get data, cleaning the data and converting it. Quickly working with polar data frames. Dumb daily stuff like "take this data from my CSV file and turn it into a Latex table"...but most importantly freeing up time from tedious administrative tasks (let's not go into detail here). Also great for brainstorming and quick drafting grant proposals. Anything prototyping and quickly glued together I'll go for LLMs (or LLM agents). They are no substitute for your own brain though. I'm also curious about the hallucinated sources. I've recently read some papers on using LLM-agents to conduct structured literature reviews and they do it quite well and fairly reproducible. I'm quite willing to build some LLM-agents to reproduce my literature review process in the near future since it's fairly algorithmic. Check for surveys and reviews on the topic, scan for interesting papers within, check sources of sources, go through A tier conference proceedings for the last X years and find relevant papers. Rinse, repeat. I'm mostly bullish because of LLM-agents, not because of using stock models with the default chat interface.