[Miguel07Code]

Mm maybe running a local LLM for doing it would be a great idea, I'll try to do that and if it doesn't work well, I'll consider doing it with an API.

[siktirlanibne]

Please don't follow the original comments suggestion; I feel that "easily digestible" is not compatible with what makes the idea shine in the first place. Your suggestion delegating such functionality to a local LLM is quite nice as a choice but adding it as a core functionality is quite antithetical to leverage the arXiv part, without which everything reverts back to a bland and generic whateverTok format.

Although the suggestion seems to be aware of the fact and provides both a good reasoning and a quite good solution (progressively deepening explanations), the implicit information and nuance lost in a summary by an unreliable LLM would undeniably turn this from a useful and interesting idea to a cool party trick no one uses for more than 5 minutes.

[qnleigh]

Yes I strongly agree with this. I also want to read the original abstracts.

[Miguel07Code]

Thanks for the feedback, I think that it would be like having 2 modes with a toggle: unhingered summaries from local LLMs or the real summaries.

[sgdpk]

Cool :) I am a scientist, so having an easier way to parse the abstracts would be most welcome. Keep up the good work.

[Miguel07Code]

Thanks! I'll text you here when I add the feature. It wouldn't be core, so I think that having two modes where you can read easily papers with LLms or not will be of great help.