Nataliya Kosmyna

But from brain perspective, from our results, it doesn't show that.

What it actually shows is that, hey, you have been really exposed to one very limited tool, right?

You know, there's not a lot of visual stuff happening.

Brain doesn't really struggle when you actually use this tool.

So you have much less of this functional connectivity.

So that's what we found.

But what is, I think, interesting and effective may be heading back to this point of laziness.

And some of these, maybe a bit more, I would say, nefarious results are, of course, other results that are relevant to the outputs, to the answers themselves.

So first of all, what we found that the S's were very homogenous.

So the vocabulary that was used was very, very similar for the LLM group.

It was not the case for the search engine and for the brain-only group.

I'm going to give you an example.

And of course, in the paper, we have multiple examples.

I'm going to give you only one.

Topic, happiness.

So we have LLM, so ChatGPT users, mentioning heavily the words career and career choice.

And surprise, surprise, these are students.

I literally just mentioned this.

Of course, they're going to more likely talk about career and career choices.

And again, who are we ultimately to judge what makes a person happy, right?