Next time just make a «[Discussion][Help] ’s Rivers of London — Ben Aaronvitch 9780575097568»🧵, and wait for everyone else interested in responding to do so.

hallucinations

No need to humanize them, they are Markov machines. That is all.

It appeared it had access

Unless you provided it, the context window did not have the context. “Appeared to” is also not a valid way to evaluate technology.

As an example, I liked to prompt them with "Tell me about 'A Valiant Effort (1989)'" as a test -- it doesn't actually exist, but they'd often tell me it was a painting or a movie or an obscure book with hallucinated details until very recently; newer models seem more likely to say "I don't know what that is" or similar, but that's not guaranteed.

To get better results, try feeding it a passage you'd like it to work on directly in the input instead of assuming it just knows the story already, and you'll get output weighted by the actual text (and whatever else you put in context).

If you had started the conversation by feeding in the actual text of the book, you would have very different results, because you would be grounding on context rather than asking the model to “figure it out somehow” based on training data.

Not sure what you were expecting, using AI is mostly about context management, and if you don’t set up the context correctly you’re asking for results similar to this.

are you able to attach the book to your chat inn the free version? do you have a digital copy?