ArticlePhotochemistry and photobiology
Performance of chatbots in queries concerning fundamental concepts in photochemistry.
Article in Photochemistry and photobiology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessing the Accuracy of ChatGPT in Answering Questions About Prolonged Disorders of Consciousness.Brain sciences · 2025Article
- Performance of chatbots in queries concerning fundamental concepts in photochemistry.Photochemistry and photobiologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The advent of chatbots raises the possibility of a paradigm shift across society including the most technical of fields with regard to access to information, generation of knowledge, and dissemination of education and training. Photochemistry is a scientific endeavor with roots in chemistry and physics and branches that encompass diverse disciplines ranging from astronomy to zoology. Here, five chatbots have each been challenged with 13 photochemically relevant queries. The chatbots included ChatGPT 3.5, ChatGPT 4.0, Copilot, Gemini Advanced, and Meta AI. The queries encompassed fundamental concepts (e.g., "Why is the fluorescence spectrum typically the mirror image of the absorption spectrum?"), practical matters (e.g., "What is the inner filter effect and how to avoid it?"), philosophical matters ("Please create the most important photochemistry questions."), and specific molecular features (e.g., "Why are azo dyes non-fluorescent?"). The chatbots were moderately effective in answering queries concerning fundamental concepts in photochemistry but were glaringly deficient in specialized queries for dyes and fluorophores. In some instances, a correct response was embedded in verbose scientific nonsense whereas in others the entire response, while grammatically correct, was utterly meaningless. The unreliable accuracy makes present chatbots poorly suited for unaided educational purposes and highlights the importance of domain experts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.