Do you have a factual dispute with what I posted?

Are any of those alternatives hallucinations, in your opinion?

I feel uncompleted to further assist these.

> Do you have a factual dispute with what I posted?

I don't have nearly enough knowledge or experience in the subject to talk about the factual accuracy of what you posted. The whole point of my comment was, neither do you.

So, to your knowledge there is no factual inconsistency with what I have posted?

You have made an assumption that I didn't review the content that I prepared to post. You have alleged in ignorance and you have disrespectfully harassed without due process.

I did not waste your time with spammy unlabeled AI BS.

I have given my "review search results" time for free; and, in this case too, I have delivered value. You made this a waste of my time. You have caused me loss with such harassment. I have not caused you loss by posting such preliminary research (which checks out).

Did others in this thread identify and share alternative solutions for getting oxygen out of titanium? I believe it was fair to identify and share alternative solutions to the OT which I (re-) posted because this is an unsolved opportunity.

I believe it's fair and advisable to consult and clearly cite AI.

Why would people cite their use of AI? Isn't that what we want?

Which helped solved for the OT problem?

Given such behavior toward me in this forum, I should omit such insightful research (into "efficient and sustainable alternatives") to deny them such advantage.

This was interesting to me and worth spending my personal time on also because removing oxygen from graphene oxide wafers is also a billion dollar idea. Does "hydrogen plasma" solve for deoxidizing that too?