[pron]

My experience with LLM has been that if the question/search is basic or common (in any particular subject), the results are no better than an ordinary search, and if it isn't, the responses are too frequently wrong. The problem isn't so much hallucination, but gullibility. The LLM appears "intelligent" but stupid. It seems to lack introspection, i.e. applying good sense in evaluating its sources and conclusions. You can ask an LLM how to properly evaluate sources and come to conclusions, but it doesn't apply these lessons to its own operation.

In other words, LLMs work well when you don't really need them and don't work well when you do. I have yet to see an LLM give a good result when a better result, written by a human, isn't available.