Generative AI has struck fear in the hearts of creators of all types, but particularly for those who deal with the written word. Freelance work for copywriters.
The big picture: If there’s one thing that generative AI is supposed to be good at, it’s analyzing the written word. However, two studies suggest that this ability may have been overhyped. One study demonstrates that Gen AI struggles with understanding long-form books, while another shows that these models find answering questions about videos challenging. This is something companies should consider as they augment their workforce with Gen AI.
Generative AI has struck fear in the hearts of creators of all types, but particularly for those who deal with the written word. Freelance work for copywriters has been drying up, largely due to the number of GenAI engines that have sprung up in recent months. Other forms of gig work have been affected too, despite the growing realization that AI isn’t entirely living up to its original hype.
Two new studies show some of the limitations of these chatbots, revealing they may be more extensive than previously realized. Both studies examine how well GenAI can make sense of enormous amounts of data. Specifically, one tested the ability of AI language models to understand and continue long stories, evaluating how well these models can comprehend and build upon extended narratives beyond typical short-range processing.
The other study focused on evaluating the performance of vision language models. Both studies found that AI falls short, including Google’s latest Gemini generative AI models, which emphasize their ability to process and analyze large amounts of data as their selling points.
