The query was exactly as you described. Gemini returned the details of the Dreamliner Air India crash, including capturing the number of people aboard the flight, the date of the flight, the location of the flight and crash - yet Gemini somehow managed to hallucinate the wrong plane, an Airbus A330-243.
Air India doesn't even have any A330s, so it's not even immediately obvious how the hallucination happened. It just straight up included the wrong plane.
This specific failure seems more egregious than most.
Nckpz · 21h ago
Just reproduced the issue with Bing's AI result. I find it kind of hilarious that in its sources, the first one listed is an article with the headline: "How Is Airbus Not Suing Google?"
salawat · 8h ago
Try asking if Case IH does the same behavior as John Deere with using excessive software locks on their hardware to prevent farmer repair of their machines.
Sometimes it just takes a little leading, but you can get these things to say whatever you want without any actual regard as to veracity.
The answer may be semantically and grammatically correct, but it is nevertheless, largely bullshit.
clipsy · 21h ago
And the output was a Boeing crash.
kristianp · 21h ago
I've found Google's AI overview to be so bad it's probably spreading misinformation. It has no ability to assess the correctness of it's results. I can only assume its enabled so that google can collect training data from user feedback on the feature.
For instance I asked google how many Apple shares one person owned, it plucked a number from an article, but that was for a deal Apple made, and the person just happened to be involved in the deal.
orionblastar · 21h ago
This is concerning, AI has to be accurate for it to work well. It can't hallucinate. Until this problem is fixed, we still need people to do the work.
Air India doesn't even have any A330s, so it's not even immediately obvious how the hallucination happened. It just straight up included the wrong plane.
This specific failure seems more egregious than most.
Sometimes it just takes a little leading, but you can get these things to say whatever you want without any actual regard as to veracity.
The answer may be semantically and grammatically correct, but it is nevertheless, largely bullshit.
For instance I asked google how many Apple shares one person owned, it plucked a number from an article, but that was for a deal Apple made, and the person just happened to be involved in the deal.