The rapid spread of the use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools and the ease of free access to some of its modalities is changing the work procedures of many citizens.
Applied in business, education, official bodies, calculation or design programs, databases and many others, they also find their use in the field of scientific research.
An article published in Nature comments that OpenIA’s “deep research tool,” which was launched on February 2, is capable of synthesizing information from dozens of web pages into extensive reports. In December Google launched a similar tool called Gemini.
Several scientists who have tried it are surprised by its ability to write literature reviews or full review articles. Advantages of using it include its speed, its ability to search the Internet, and the improved reasoning skills of the language model.
However, on its website, OpenIA admits that its tool has limitations and can make mistakes in bibliographic citations and fail to distinguish between reliable information and hearsay.
Grok 3, the new version of AI developed by xIA, Elon Musk’s Artificial Intelligence company, was presented on February 18.
This is an improved version of the tool launched in August, with 10 times the performance of the previous version. It also uses self-correction mechanisms that avoid the mistakes of some AI chatbots, which give false facts as certain.
According to its promoters, it is a very precise tool that will be integrated into X, allowing access to real-time data. It is a paid tool that will be accessed by paying a monthly fee for X Premium+.
In performance tests conducted by the company xIA, Grok 3 has outperformed Google’s Gemini, DeepSeek and OpenIA’s Chat GPT.
Bioethical assessment
The rapid evolution of publicly available AI presents as many possibilities as risks. These tools use algorithms designed to handle a huge amount of data, combining them in a pre-established way to produce results that are not free of bias.
These biases may be due to the inherent limitations of these tools, which requires their prudent use and the need for learning that allows one to take advantage of their wide utility without falling into indiscriminate trust in the veracity of their results.
The proposal for an ethical use of these tools involves their prudent application and the critical analysis of their results, which avoids transferring the possible biases and errors inherent in their use to the lives of citizens, their education or their culture.
