Your Feedback on AI in Logos and in General

We'd love for you all to take 5–10 minutes and answer these 23 questions about AI in Logos and in general. It'll really help us as we continue to develop Logos to make sure we're focusing on the right things and delivering you value that you can't get anywhere else. We'd love to hear anything you want to share publicly here in this thread, too—whether directly related to the questions in the survey or more broadly.

We highly value you, your use of Logos, and your engagement here in this community. Thanks in advance for helping us better understand your use, thoughts, and feelings on AI.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Fabian

I really love AI in Logos Bible Software. It makes Logos so much better. I use AI in Logos every day. My favorite AI tools are Study Assistant, Translation, Smart Search and Synopsis and Questions to ask in Factbook.

Sean

Sure.

My main points:

+I love Logos AI for its good execution of my sloppy searches and its ability to mine my library and find useful resources I didn't even know I had. It saves me time with this and also sometimes makes me go deeper than I otherwise would.

-Logos AI is itself sometimes sloppy. Instead of zeroing on the best resources for query, it seems to prefer those with wording closest to what I asked.

-Logos AI seems very biased. I don't know if this is because of preprogrammed suppositions or because of the general bent of the Logos catalogue it works from. (I can expand on this if desired, but it would reveal my own theological and other biases.)

Accordingly, I find it mostly useful for refreshing things I already know. I do not trust it very far on topics I do not know. Thankfully, in those cases, it points me to sources I can study further—but I'm usually unimpressed with its selection of sources.

All that said, I do find it useful; I appreciate its continuous development; I think it has good potential for greater usefulness in the future.

Aaron Hamilton

Smart search has been a great blessing to me. I use it more than any other AI feature. However, I understand that development time is limited and would love to see other areas within Logos receive attention. Quick examples are follow only for desktop, notes, prioritization, and interlinear for mobile. I wouldn't mind seeing AI development slow down in preference of these other areas.

Jack Caviness

@Sean I'm usually unimpressed with its selection of sources.

In version 50 you have increased control over the sources. Collections are a big help.

Sean

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1399908#Comment_1399908

Yes it is improving in that direction, but it also somewhat defeats the purpose of using the Study Assistant (primarily what I'm talking about here) and especially the "all books" options. If I limit it to a collection, I probably know what I am looking for; I use the SA more when I don't. It tends to zero in on popular resources that use similar wording to my prompt when typically I don't want those. If I ask it, say, to use more academic and technical resources and commentaries, it is unable to do so. Or to explore a topic using the critical commentaries in its catalogue—it can't do that either. Improvements with those sort of things are what I'd like to see most. Also the ability to give more detailed answers and use more than 4 sources.

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1399897#Comment_1399897

All good points. Of course as an unsubscriber, I got thru half of the survey before I killed it. Claude et al work fine, but can't do Logos' needed fancy dancing (your examples).

Theophan Dort

@Sean wrote:

-Logos AI seems very biased. I don't know if this is because of preprogrammed suppositions or because of the general bent of the Logos catalogue it works from. (I can expand on this if desired, but it would reveal my own theological and other biases.)

You certainly are under no obligation to say more than you are comfortable saying, but I can't imagine your statement is any more intelligible to Logos than it is to me without offering examples of what made you say that. I'm an (Eastern) Orthodox Christian, so I would frankly expect a rather Evangelical bias from Logos tools referencing Logos resources because Logos in general seems to me so heavily of, by, for, about Evangelical Christians, but in my rather cautious and hesitant experimenting with AI, Logos' and otherwise, so far, anyway, I have found it a useful tool and certainly wouldn't have said "very" biased, anyway. I'm NOT trying to pressure you to say anything you're not entirely comfortable with! But you said "if desired," and I really can't know what you meant at all without some specific examples. If you're willing, I'd be interested. Thanks!

NichtnurBibelleser

As stated before, I

expect Study Assistant in Verbum to answer questions from a Roman Catholic point of view (as long as Verbum is marketed as a Catholic App)
really would like to have RGG4 (and other works, like e.g. this one) linked to the Advanced Timeline
would like to have complete tagging of Readers Editions of scholary works (like e.g. this one)
would like to have complete tagging of the single resources contained in GBWW
would like to have all resources cited by Vieweger and RGG4 which are carried by Logos / Verbum fully linked

Morgan

I'd like to see AI develop in areas that originally drew me to Logos. In physical formats, it was hard to know if a book was relevant unless I had already read it or scanned through the index. Logos search capabilities helped in removing a lot of that grunt work and opened up more time for thinking instead of hunting. Now, with a library larger than anything I've had access to before, even Logos search can feel like grunt work in applying the right tags and sorting through hundreds or even thousands of search hits. I want an AI librarian that points me to the best resources that directly concern my research.

Study assistant does decent job at this, but only if you've put in the work to make collections. But, with collections it can sometimes be too limiting. In studying Isaiah 3, study assistant pointed me to my books on Isaiah collection. But then I considered some feminist perspectives would be useful for that chapter and had to reconfigure my collection to include those resources that weren't captured with my initial collection.

So I guess I'd say that All/Your Books search can be too broad or shallow, while collections can be too limiting without a broader knowledge of what's in your library.

Otherwise I would kill everything in Sermon builder as it's completely useless.

Jack Caviness

@Sean If I limit it to a collection, I probably know what I am looking for; I use the SA more when I don't. It tends to zero in on popular resources that use similar wording to my prompt when typically I don't want those. If I ask it, say, to use more academic and technical resources and commentaries, it is unable to do so.

What you are doing seems more a function of Smart Search. Study Assistant is designed to locate resources that will provide additional information on the topic you are studying. To search "academic and technical resources and commentaries" first make a collection of them, then limit SA to that collection.

I asked SA "Was Job boasting in chapter 29?" I first searched in Your Books, then in CommentaryPrimary, CommentarySecondary, and CommentaryNonVersified. For good measure, I used the Author facet for "Garrett." From that I received a number of useful resources—some for bad examples, but that is the way research goes.

I already had my opinion on the subject, but it never hurts to seek assistance from those with contrary views.