Accordance AI Adoption..

[Brian K. Mitchell]

On 8/6/2024 at 4:23 AM, Dr. Nathan Parker said:

A few comments....

@Dr. Nathan Parker if Accordance's hypothetical AI allowed us to construct and run queries verbally that might be interesting or at least fun to play with.

[William Cross]

In my use of Accordance, I still find that when I need to research something I almost always end up using Google or a website to find information (because 1. it is fast, 2 uses natural language, not merely search terms 3. doesn't tell me the word/words I am searching for cannot be found, 4. it finds the info I need and compiles the pertanent results without having to dig through piles of results connected to a search term that often has nothing to do with what I am looking for) and then I have to come back to Accordance to look at my tools hoping I can unlock the secret combination of search terms (most of the time even NEAR or WITHIN would not really help) to find the info in the hundreds of reliable/trusted modules I have invested in. I have kinda resolved (sadly) that beyond Bible searches and related Commentaries, Research is just much faster and easier on the internet, looking things up on Google, GotQuestions, or a website instead of Accordance.

[cweber]

Python has a many libraries, including natural language processing (NLP), for working with textual data. The question is what data could be made available through the API without breaking copyright and licensing?

 

An API would only be as good as what data the tools using it can work with.

 

I would be happy to simply start with improving the metadata and management of my purchased collections.

 

Edited August 7 by cweber

[A. Smith]

On 8/5/2024 at 2:23 PM, Dr. Nathan Parker said:

we want Accordance in as many hands as possible

 

I am sure this is a stated objective from the highest levels, but I'd like t suggest caution. Accordance began as niche scholarly software. It still largely fits that niche. An attempt to mass-market for everyone leads to something like L, which is, imo, not easily used for real scholarly work. And, yes. I understand at least some of the implications of this approach. It requires, at the least, a mindset that accordance is not a cash cow, but a targeted ministry which can, we hope, minimally support itself. 

[Dr. Nathan Parker]

2 hours ago, A. Smith said:

I am sure this is a stated objective from the highest levels, but I'd like t suggest caution. Accordance began as niche scholarly software. It still largely fits that niche. An attempt to mass-market for everyone leads to something like L, which is, imo, not easily used for real scholarly work. And, yes. I understand at least some of the implications of this approach. It requires, at the least, a mindset that accordance is not a cash cow, but a targeted ministry which can, we hope, minimally support itself. 

 

Good points. What I was primarily referring to was not book choices, but making an observation about AI that some academic institutions restrict the use of tools that include any AI capabilities. That's a serious thing we need to keep in mind that if we do wade into AI, we should seriously consider that schools who restrict AI tools aren't excluded from using the rest of Accordance. That's why my personal preference about considering AI an addon like we did with Atlas/Timeline, in my personal opinion, sounds ideal. Anyone who doesn't want AI or is restricted from using AI can continue enjoying all the other features of Accordance and just wouldn't purchase/install the AI stuff. Those who do want it and can use it could purchase/install it. To me personally, it'd be a "win win" for everyone if we considered that direction.

[cweber]

The optional API could host a place on Accordance website to upload development code for review or sharing with the community of programmers wanting to use it.

[Thomas Wagler]

On 8/7/2024 at 3:51 PM, William Cross said:

In my use of Accordance, I still find that when I need to research something I almost always end up using Google or a website to find information (because 1. it is fast, 2 uses natural language, not merely search terms 3. doesn't tell me the word/words I am searching for cannot be found, 4. it finds the info I need and compiles the pertanent results without having to dig through piles of results connected to a search term that often has nothing to do with what I am looking for) and then I have to come back to Accordance to look at my tools hoping I can unlock the secret combination of search terms (most of the time even NEAR or WITHIN would not really help) to find the info in the hundreds of reliable/trusted modules I have invested in. I have kinda resolved (sadly) that beyond Bible searches and related Commentaries, Research is just much faster and easier on the internet, looking things up on Google, GotQuestions, or a website instead of Accordance.

There are many well stated concerns, cautions, and pros to AI on this thread. However like another person mentioned there may be more people out there who are using Accordance that are admittedly not scholars. I for one am a bi-vocational pastor that would love to see the "both/and" search implemented. Continue the purity of the current search functions, but implement AI to help sort and process relevant info in study aids to help point us in the correct directions. Unfortunately, there are some of us in the world who must earn our "bread" by the sweat of our brow, while also breaking "The Bread" to those we lead. I seems a shame to the have 1000s of dollars of tools only to be overwhelmed with the "inaccessibility" or pages of "key word" searches that are not relevant. A predigested search return with hyperlinks would be great.