Perplexity now displays results for temperature, currency conversion and simple math, so you don't have to use Google

Aravind Srinivas, CEO of Perplexity, speaks during the Semafor 2024 World Economy Summit in Washington, DC in Washington, DC, on April 18, 2024. (Photo by SAUL LOEB/AFP via Getty Images)

Image Credits: SAUL LOEB/AFP / Getty Images

Amid ongoing controversy about handling of media articles and original reporting, AI-powered search startup Perplexity now displays results for factual queries such as weather and time at a place, currency conversion, and answers to simple math queries directly through cards. This is a move to stop Perplexity users from going to other search engines like Google for such results.

To be clear, Perplexity could already fetch this data from the web and display results in a descriptive way, but the company is adding some visual flair to these results to make them more prominent and quick. On X, CEO Aravind Srinivas said that these basic queries now should work fast on the search engine.

Notably, Srinivas said last year that Google handles basic queries like weather, time and live sports scores well, and his company had a lot of work to do. While Google displays a lot of card-based info, including sports tournament tables and basic movie information, Perplexity also moves in the direction of displaying direct results instead of fetching from other sources.

For these new search results, such as weather info and currency conversions, Perplexity doesn’t link to any sources. Last month, Srinivas mentioned that the search startup was working with a company called Tako, an AI search engine for visualizing information, to display information such as stock prices.

Perplexity faced criticism from the media earlier this month, when Forbes executive editor John Paczkowski pointed out that the search engine showed Forbes’ original, paywalled reporting about ex-Google CEO Eric Schmidt’s drone company in search results without proper attribution and with near identical writing language in Perplexity’s recently launched Pages feature. Forbes said that its reporting was also mentioned prominently in Perplexity’s AI-generated podcast.

The argument from various critics is that without proper credits and getting enough link-back traffic in return, AI-powered search engines generating (or re-generating) media content will eat up publications’ business.

Last week, the Amazon-backed startup’s chief business officer, Dmitry Shevelenko, told Semafor that the company was already exploring revenue-sharing deals with publications. He said that these deals would allow the publishers to earn recurring income.

Perplexity now displays results for temperature, currency conversion and simple math, so you don't have to use Google

Aravind Srinivas, CEO of Perplexity, speaks during the Semafor 2024 World Economy Summit in Washington, DC in Washington, DC, on April 18, 2024. (Photo by SAUL LOEB/AFP via Getty Images)

Image Credits: SAUL LOEB/AFP / Getty Images

Amid ongoing controversy about handling of media articles and original reporting, AI-powered search startup Perplexity now displays results for factual queries such as weather and time at a place, currency conversion, and answers to simple math queries directly through cards. This is a move to stop Perplexity users from going to other search engines like Google for such results.

To be clear, Perplexity could already fetch this data from the web and display results in a descriptive way, but the company is adding some visual flair to these results to make them more prominent and quick. On X, CEO Aravind Srinivas said that these basic queries now should work fast on the search engine.

Notably, Srinivas said last year that Google handles basic queries like weather, time and live sports scores well, and his company had a lot of work to do. While Google displays a lot of card-based info, including sports tournament tables and basic movie information, Perplexity also moves in the direction of displaying direct results instead of fetching from other sources.

For these new search results, such as weather info and currency conversions, Perplexity doesn’t link to any sources. Last month, Srinivas mentioned that the search startup was working with a company called Tako, an AI search engine for visualizing information, to display information such as stock prices.

Perplexity faced criticism from the media earlier this month, when Forbes executive editor John Paczkowski pointed out that the search engine showed Forbes’ original, paywalled reporting about ex-Google CEO Eric Schmidt’s drone company in search results without proper attribution and with near identical writing language in Perplexity’s recently launched Pages feature. Forbes said that its reporting was also mentioned prominently in Perplexity’s AI-generated podcast.

The argument from various critics is that without proper credits and getting enough link-back traffic in return, AI-powered search engines generating (or re-generating) media content will eat up publications’ business.

Last week, the Amazon-backed startup’s chief business officer, Dmitry Shevelenko, told Semafor that the company was already exploring revenue-sharing deals with publications. He said that these deals would allow the publishers to earn recurring income.

Illustration of a superconductor levitating above a magnet.

Is the latest near-room-temperature superconductor legit? Don’t count on it

Illustration of a superconductor levitating above a magnet.

Image Credits: ktsimage (opens in a new window) / Getty Images

If you’re someone who loves an internet hype cycle, good news: There’s a new group of scientists who claim to have discovered a near-room-temperature superconductor.

Yes, again.

People on X (formerly Twitter), Hacker News and all the other places science enthusiasts post are getting worked up about a new material described in a paper that was posted on Tuesday to arXiv, the pre-print server. (It should be noted that most of these people do not appear to be scientists let alone condensed-matter physicists.) In the paper, the Chinese team says the material exhibits one of the properties of superconductors at temperatures as warm as –23°C (–9.4°F). That’s not room temperature, but it’s much easier to maintain than existing high-temperature superconductors, which have to be at around –170°C (–274°F).

If the paper’s results are what they say, that is.

It wouldn’t be the first time people’s hopes were dashed. Last year was a banner year for room-temperature superconductors that weren’t. The one that grabbed the most headlines — LK-99 — dominated the internet for a few weeks over the summer before succumbing to the scientific method. Turns out it was little more than a lead-laced refrigerator magnet. Another one, detailed in a paper co-authored by Ranga Dias and others, made a splash in March only to be subject to a retraction in September.

This new material picks up where LK-99 left off, which isn’t really an auspicious starting point.

Like LK-99, it’s a copper-doped lead apatite, a crystalline form of lead containing copper. This new material tinkers with LK-99’s chemical formula a bit, tweaking the ratios and adding sulfur. Those of you with exceptional memories might remember that copper sulfide was the contaminant that gave LK-99 its bizarre properties; once other scientists made an uncontaminated sample, those properties vanished.

The team behind this new material added the sulfur intentionally to create lead sulfide. They succeeded, but they also ended up making copper sulfide. They tried to tease out the two effects, and they acknowledged that the contaminant’s presence generated some interference when they went to test for superconductivity. At least the team was transparent about that.

Another room-temperature superconductor bites the dust

If my skepticism was piqued by the material’s similarity to LK-99, it grew as I read the five-page paper. At first, the brevity gave me some pause, as did the low-res figures, which looked like they were scanned from the output of a dot-matrix printer. The single paragraph that describes how the team created the material is about 100 words long. Concise methods aren’t bad, per se, but generally the more detail, the better.

Then there’s the data: While the team tested for the Meissner effect, they didn’t report testing whether the material exhibited any resistance. The only reported test involved sweeping the material with a magnetic field generated by a direct current and observing its magnetic properties. That’s odd because the definition of a superconductor is a material that conducts electricity without any resistance.

Now, I’m not a condensed matter physicist, but I do have an advanced scientific degree (meaning I’ve read a lot of scientific papers), and I’ve been a science journalist for well over a decade (meaning I’ve covered a wide range of fields, including physics). None of what I read or saw in that paper gives me confidence that this thing is real. I’m not alone, either: After I read the arXiv paper, I came across posts from fellow science journalist Dan Garisto, who is much more qualified than me to weigh in on the matter. He’s maybe even more skeptical than I am.

I might be proven wrong — wouldn’t that be great, actually! The world could use a superconducting material made from abundant materials that doesn’t require liquid nitrogen or helium to maintain its special properties. But the odds are stacked against it. Don’t hold your breath (again).

Illustration of a superconductor levitating above a magnet.

Is the latest near-room-temperature superconductor legit? Don’t count on it

Illustration of a superconductor levitating above a magnet.

Image Credits: ktsimage (opens in a new window) / Getty Images

If you’re someone who loves an internet hype cycle, good news: There’s a new group of scientists who claim to have discovered a near-room-temperature superconductor.

Yes, again.

People on X (formerly Twitter), Hacker News and all the other places science enthusiasts post are getting worked up about a new material described in a paper that was posted on Tuesday to arXiv, the pre-print server. (It should be noted that most of these people do not appear to be scientists let alone condensed-matter physicists.) In the paper, the Chinese team says the material exhibits one of the properties of superconductors at temperatures as warm as –23°C (–9.4°F). That’s not room temperature, but it’s much easier to maintain than existing high-temperature superconductors, which have to be at around –170°C (–274°F).

If the paper’s results are what they say, that is.

It wouldn’t be the first time people’s hopes were dashed. Last year was a banner year for room-temperature superconductors that weren’t. The one that grabbed the most headlines — LK-99 — dominated the internet for a few weeks over the summer before succumbing to the scientific method. Turns out it was little more than a lead-laced refrigerator magnet. Another one, detailed in a paper co-authored by Ranga Dias and others, made a splash in March only to be subject to a retraction in September.

This new material picks up where LK-99 left off, which isn’t really an auspicious starting point.

Like LK-99, it’s a copper-doped lead apatite, a crystalline form of lead containing copper. This new material tinkers with LK-99’s chemical formula a bit, tweaking the ratios and adding sulfur. Those of you with exceptional memories might remember that copper sulfide was the contaminant that gave LK-99 its bizarre properties; once other scientists made an uncontaminated sample, those properties vanished.

The team behind this new material added the sulfur intentionally to create lead sulfide. They succeeded, but they also ended up making copper sulfide. They tried to tease out the two effects, and they acknowledged that the contaminant’s presence generated some interference when they went to test for superconductivity. At least the team was transparent about that.

Another room-temperature superconductor bites the dust

If my skepticism was piqued by the material’s similarity to LK-99, it grew as I read the five-page paper. At first, the brevity gave me some pause, as did the low-res figures, which looked like they were scanned from the output of a dot-matrix printer. The single paragraph that describes how the team created the material is about 100 words long. Concise methods aren’t bad, per se, but generally the more detail, the better.

Then there’s the data: While the team tested for the Meissner effect, they didn’t report testing whether the material exhibited any resistance. The only reported test involved sweeping the material with a magnetic field generated by a direct current and observing its magnetic properties. That’s odd because the definition of a superconductor is a material that conducts electricity without any resistance.

Now, I’m not a condensed matter physicist, but I do have an advanced scientific degree (meaning I’ve read a lot of scientific papers), and I’ve been a science journalist for well over a decade (meaning I’ve covered a wide range of fields, including physics). None of what I read or saw in that paper gives me confidence that this thing is real. I’m not alone, either: After I read the arXiv paper, I came across posts from fellow science journalist Dan Garisto, who is much more qualified than me to weigh in on the matter. He’s maybe even more skeptical than I am.

I might be proven wrong — wouldn’t that be great, actually! The world could use a superconducting material made from abundant materials that doesn’t require liquid nitrogen or helium to maintain its special properties. But the odds are stacked against it. Don’t hold your breath (again).

An illustrator's vision of waves of graphene.

Latest room-temperature claims met with heaps of skepticism

An illustrator's vision of waves of graphene.

Image Credits: Rost-9D / Getty Images

Just when you thought the hype about room-temperature superconductors was over, it’s not.

A Swiss quantum algorithm startup, Terra Quantum, and a research lab at the State University of Campinas (Unicamp) in Brazil claim that they have discovered a form of graphite that superconducts at ambient temperature and pressure.

Terra Quantum isn’t a small operation. The company raised $60 million early in 2022 for its quantum-as-a-service platform. But that doesn’t mean you should get your hopes up.

Room-temperature superconductors, if one is ever found and independently confirmed, could revolutionize everything from electricity transmission to computing, electric vehicles, MRI machines, maglev trains and more.

Lately, claims of room-temperature superconductivity seem to be blooming like flowers after a rainstorm. In the last year alone, three high-profile cases were either debunked, retracted or seriously doubted.

Consider this latest one to fall into the latter category. Researchers who TechCrunch+ spoke with were skeptical that this new material is a room-temperature superconductor.

“I want to believe, and I think it’s out there to be had,” said Jamil Tahir-Kheli, a senior staff scientist at Caltech. But “I found a lot of problems with the paper,” he said, adding that if he had been a referee on the peer-review article, “I would not have accepted it.”

The work was published in Advanced Quantum Technologies, a niche journal rather than one in the top-tier like Science or Nature, where other room-temperature superconductor claims have been published — and retracted. That’s not necessarily a strike against the work, but it does explain why it didn’t make a splash when it was first published on December 31. In fact, TechCrunch+ only found out about the paper when Terra Quantum’s PR reached out.

The material described in the paper isn’t new, per se, but rather a new configuration of graphite. The secret, the paper’s authors say, was getting the graphite to wrinkle in such a way that it creates rows of small ridges, along which superconducting currents can flow.

“It is very well known that if you have just a one-dimensional system, then superconductivity is not possible. But what helps now is these wrinkles,” Valerii Vinokur, Terra Quantum’s CTO for the United States and corresponding author on the paper, told TechCrunch+. This, coupled with a metallic layer, “stabilizes superconductivity,” he added.

Though Terra Quantum is almost entirely focused on the software side of quantum computing, CEO Markus Pflitsch said that the company is working on a few hardware projects, this being one of them.

To measure the superconductivity, the researchers placed 11 electrodes perpendicular to the wrinkles in the graphite and applied a direct current between the first and last leads. In the graphs that they use to help support their claims of superconductivity, the researchers noticed a sharp change in resistance in the current flowing between leads nine and 10.

That might be consistent with superconductivity, but more likely the results were spoiled by heat spilling into the graphite sample when the electric current was applied to lead 11, Tahir-Kheli said. By measuring for superconductivity at leads nine and 10, right next to lead 11, “how do you really know that your sample is at the temperature you think it’s at? You don’t,” he said. “I would have used [leads] four and eight.”

That heat might be especially problematic when testing a material like graphite. Slight temperature variations can cause a sudden wave of electrons changing positions, so to speak. (Technically speaking, with small changes in temperature the electrons shift between insulator and metallic states.) That surge of electrons might be mistaken for superconductivity, Tahir-Kheli said.

When the Terra Quantum and Unicamp researchers did measure drops in resistance, a hallmark of superconductivity, the drop was too sudden for Tahir-Kheli’s liking. If he saw something like that in his lab, he would have redone the experiment and taken more measurements in the area of interest over a longer period of time. That would help flesh out the true shape of the curve and help minimize any noise and error.

That doesn’t appear to have happened in this study. “I would have wanted to knock the error bars down as small as possible. And I would have wanted to see this whole curve,” Tahir-Kheli said.

Nor did the team appear to have run the experiments forward and backward, from high temperature to low temperature and back again. Doing so would have allowed the team to retrace their curve, and if there were no differences, be more confident that the results were due to some superconductivity effect rather than temperature differences within the material.

Lastly, there’s the question of why a quantum computing startup is pursuing a room-temperature superconductor in the first place. Pflitsch said that Terra Quantum sees great potential in superconducting quantum computers, though it will need new materials to realize it. “With standard superconductivity, we see it very challenging to scale it beyond, let’s say, 10,000 qubits,” he said.

A room-temperature superconductor would clearly be a breakthrough, though one that’s not necessarily beneficial to their core business today. Yet superconductors are not the real reason people want to keep quantum computers so cold. Rather, it’s their desire to eliminate noise generated by vibrating atoms, and cooling them near absolute zero helps quiet those quivers.

“Forget about the superconductors. They’re fighting thermal noise everywhere,” Tahir-Kheli said. “But you know, if you take two trendy buzzwords and put them together, it’s probably worth something right?”

Updated on January 30: After publication, Terra Quantum sent the following statement:

While scientific skepticism is expected regarding any new research discovery, the critique ignores several key points:Twenty years ago there were findings of room temperature localized superconductivity in graphite.It is textbook knowledge that resistance may drop sharply at superconductivity onset.There is near-perfect agreement between superconducting transitions from resistance and magnetization measurements.That heat does not cause resistance to drop is ignored.The discovery of high-temperature superconductivity by Bednorz and Müller was published in a niche journal yet was recognized with a Nobel Prize.Valerii Vinokur, the project lead, is a laureate of International John Bardeen and Abrikosov Prizes, and Fritz London Memorial Prize.