This webpage was generated automatically; to view the article in its original setting, you can click the link below:
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/19/travel/how-ai-tools-helped-the-travel-team-study-its-places-to-go-lists.html
and if you wish to remove this article from our site, please get in touch with us
We utilized various A.I. search tools, including Gemini, a substantial language framework capable of processing documents of up to 750,000 words, and Semantra, an open-source “semantic search tool” developed by Mr. Freedman. Rather than searching for precise terms — like “sustainability” or “climate change” — it explores concepts or themes. “It’s a new model of search, not focusing on keywords, but attempting to grasp meaning,” Mr. Freedman stated.
The Times has specific regulations about the use of A.I., and any content that originates directly from an A.I. system cannot be included in our articles, partially due to the risk of hallucinations — essentially, the program fabricating information. Thus, after conducting our inquiries using those search engines, Mr. Seward and Mr. Freedman passed the findings to Ms. Mzezewa. From her viewpoint, the technology proved most beneficial in uncovering intriguing insights within that extensive text, such as the influence of global events on the list, illustrated by the 2009 inclusion of Kabul, the capital of Afghanistan (which we referred to as a “fragile city on the route to recovery”).
She found Semantra particularly advantageous “because it provided more context over time,” she explained, revealing how we had discussed subjects like overtourism and the growth of social media in travel, even if those exact phrases weren’t used.
For instance, we had instructed the A.I. programs to identify occasions when we had mentioned sustainable travel. While that term did not really exist at the time the list started, the notion of more eco-friendly travel certainly did. One of the examples surfaced by the search engine was Star Island in the Bahamas, which first appeared on our list as the “eco-destination of the year” in 2009.
As we humans began examining the years of lists, certain themes prominently emerged: The influence of smartphones and social media, the increasing concern regarding climate change, and the potential adverse effects of travel, such as overcrowding. The analysis conducted by the A.I. tools essentially aligned with our own, providing a form of high-tech reinforcement to our journalistic intuition.
Selecting our list each year is a collaborative effort that necessitates awareness of travel trends, an appreciation for striking visuals, and an understanding of what individuals are seeking in their travels — to highlight just a few of the skills utilized. Artificial intelligence is unlikely to select our Places to Go in the near future, but it can assist us in comprehending where we have traveled.
This webpage was generated automatically; to view the article in its original setting, you can click the link below:
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/19/travel/how-ai-tools-helped-the-travel-team-study-its-places-to-go-lists.html
and if you wish to remove this article from our site, please get in touch with us
This webpage was generated programmatically; to view the article in its initial setting, please follow…
This webpage was generated programmatically; to view the article at its original source, you can…
This document was generated automatically; to read the article in its original setting, please follow…
This page was generated automatically. To access the article at its source, please follow the…
This page was generated through programming, to view the article in its original setting, you…
This webpage was generated programmatically. To view the article at its original source, you can…