nostr:npub1ve7g5q4lsth9z6n39mt9sctj8708sxcn465ucm8m9fancgg02l3ql8ydyh also while the marketing claims are that it’s more factual and reliable, academic literature does not seem to bear that out as far as I’ve seen. For a recent example, https://arxiv.org/pdf/2307.09009.pdf
I’ve seen it do okay at *parsing* tasks, where it’s only responsible for interpreting input rather than producing output. Still not 100% reliable but if you can check its work it doesn’t seem too bad. A “calculator for words” if you can structure your expectations appropriately