Dependence solely on Wikipedia for information can be a risky endeavour and highlights the importance of cross-referencing with the original sources provided in the footnotes.
In an effort to address this concern, researchers have introduced an AI system known as SIDE.
This system serves a dual purpose and aims to both confirm the accuracy of primary sources and propose alternative ones.
However, it is essential to underscore that SIDE functions on the assumption that the information presented on Wikipedia is accurate.
While it can scrutinize the credibility of a source, it is not equipped to independently verify the claims contained within a Wikipedia entry.
A study yielded intriguing results and indicated that individuals preferred the AI’s recommended citations over the original sources in 70% of instances.
Fascinatingly, in nearly half of these cases, SIDE recommended a source that was already designated as the top reference on Wikipedia.
Moreover, in 21% of cases, SIDE exhibited its proactive nature by suggesting a reference that had already received the stamp of approval from human annotators.
Despite these commendable capabilities, researchers have openly acknowledged that there may exist alternative AI programs capable of surpassing SIDE in terms of quality and speed.
Furthermore, it’s worth noting that SIDE primarily focuses on web page references, while Wikipedia relies on a vast array of sources, spanning from traditional books and scientific articles to multimedia content such as images and videos.
