**Qwen AI Chatbot: A New Era for Comprehensive Research and Multimedia Content Generation**
Qwen, the dedicated AI research group within the Chinese tech giant Alibaba, recently rolled out a significant upgrade to its AI chatbot. This upgrade empowers users to generate comprehensive research documents on virtually any topic. Even more impressively, users can effortlessly convert these documents into clean, professional-grade webpages or engaging multi-speaker podcasts with just a few clicks.
—
### What Is Qwen Chat?
Qwen Chat offers a user interface similar to ChatGPT, DeepSeek, or Claude, making it familiar and easy to use. Best of all, it is freely available worldwide. The new functionality is powered by three open-source models working seamlessly together:
– **Qwen3-Coder**: Handles web structure generation.
– **Qwen-Image**: Produces inline graphics to enrich content.
– **Qwen3-TTS**: Powers dynamic audio narration.
Despite its reliance on open-source models, the entire end-to-end experience—including research execution, web deployment, and audio generation—is hosted and operated by Qwen as a managed service.
—
### How Does It Work?
The workflow begins inside Qwen Chat, where users input research questions. Following some clarifications, the AI conducts web searches, analyzes data from public sources, and compiles a comprehensive, fully cited research report.
From there, two new options appear:
– **Web Dev**: Instantly produces a live, professional-grade webpage automatically deployed and hosted by Qwen. These pages include inline graphics and clean formatting.
– **Podcast**: Generates an audio discussion featuring dynamic multi-speaker narration. Users can select from 17 host voices and seven co-host options, creating a more engaging listening experience.
—
### Testing the Models: Qwen vs. Gemini, ChatGPT, and Grok
To evaluate Qwen’s effectiveness as a research tool, we ran the same complex research query across four AI systems: Qwen, Gemini, ChatGPT, and Grok. The task was to analyze philosophical and scientific arguments for and against the existence of God. Each model produced a full research report.
We assessed the results based on five criteria:
1. **Accuracy of claims and citations**
2. **Information provided**
3. **Clarity of explanation**
4. **Intellectual richness**
5. **Overall quality**
—
### In-Depth Review
#### Accuracy
Qwen excelled in representing philosophical positions and scientific claims accurately, with proper source attribution. For example, in discussing the cosmological argument, Qwen cited academic sources like Bertrand Russell’s *Why I am not a Christian* and the debate between William Lane Craig and Peter Atkins, complete with specific references.
Unlike some other AI researchers such as Perplexity or Grok, Qwen predominantly used reputable academic sources, including original texts and links from Stanford, Princeton, Oxford, and Drew University, adding relevant analysis from Quora and Facebook where appropriate.
Gemini matched Qwen’s precision with 94 numbered citations, although some were duplicated across sections. Both correctly distinguished between complex concepts, avoiding common mistakes like conflating biblical literalism with general theism.
ChatGPT leaned heavily on the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy but occasionally oversimplified nuanced ideas. Grok provided accurate summaries but with vaguer attributions, referencing philosophers like Plato and Aristotle without citing specific works.
*Result:* Qwen and Gemini led in accuracy.
—
#### Information Provided
Qwen stood out by including a unique section titled “Critiques of Atheism: The Burden of Proof and the Nature of Evidence.” This part delved into debates that other models overlooked, such as distinguishing between “weak atheism” (skepticism toward God claims) and “gnostic atheism” (asserting God does not exist). It cited atheist thinkers like Gary Whittenberger and discussed standards like “beyond a reasonable doubt.”
An example passage from Qwen states:
> “One of the most contentious issues is the burden of proof. Bertrand Russell famously illustrated this with his teapot analogy: just as he could not prove that a tiny teapot does not orbit the sun between Earth and Mars, he argued that theists could not prove that God does exist.”
Gemini offered strong coverage of consciousness arguments and explicitly warned against “God-of-the-gaps” reasoning. ChatGPT included pragmatic arguments such as Pascal’s Wager and explored real-world implications for ethics and policy. Grok produced a more concise report—about one-third the length of Qwen’s—but added a helpful summary table.
*Result:* Qwen provided the most exhaustive information.
—
#### Clarity
Grok excelled at presenting arguments clearly, using a clean table format to organize points by type (Philosophical vs. Scientific, For vs. Against) with explicit section breaks for easy scanning.
ChatGPT made complex ideas digestible by using parenthetical clarifications. For instance:
> “If God’s existence is even possible (i.e., logically coherent), then God exists necessarily.”
Qwen and Gemini adopted a more formal, academic style. Qwen organized content under formal headings like “Theistic Arguments for God’s Existence: Cosmological and Teleological Foundations,” which, while dense, enhanced scholarly rigor. Gemini used Roman numerals for sectioning but required closer reading.
*Result:* ChatGPT was the clearest for general audiences, followed by Grok.
—
#### Diversity of Sources
Qwen integrated a diverse range of sources, combining technical philosophy (kalām cosmological arguments, Principle of Sufficient Reason, modal S5 logic) with current scientific debates (Big Bang singularities, quantum fluctuations, DNA functionality). It also provided background explanations, tables, and specific examples.
Gemini matched this breadth by covering consciousness arguments usually ignored by others, and delivered explicit critiques of flawed reasoning.
ChatGPT contributed a unique “Implications” section, exploring how the debate impacts science education, bioethics, and personal attitudes toward death—less academic but highly relevant.
Grok mentioned major arguments and some scientific concepts like fine-tuning and the anthropic principle but did not dive deeply or cite precise values.
*Result:* Qwen and Gemini led in source diversity.
—
#### Overall Quality
Both Qwen and Gemini produced reports suitable for academic citation. Qwen’s unique strength was its balance between detailed theistic and atheistic arguments, including the burden-of-proof discussion. Gemini excelled in integrating cutting-edge scientific topics alongside philosophy.
ChatGPT delivered solid pedagogical value and was excellent for teaching or practical understanding. Grok served well as a quick reference or primer.
In summary, ChatGPT and Grok are best for casual use—quick knowledge refreshes or light conversations—while Qwen and Gemini cater to serious researchers and academics.
—
### Final Scores
| Model | Score |
|———-|——–|
| Qwen | 9/10 |
| Gemini | 9/10 |
| ChatGPT | 8/10 |
| Grok | 6/10 |
—
### The Podcast Feature: Qwen vs. Gemini
Qwen’s podcast function competes directly with Google’s NotebookLM and Gemini, pioneers in AI-generated audio summaries. Qwen offers a wide variety of host voices—17 hosts and 7 co-hosts—enabling multi-speaker conversations rather than simple text-to-speech narration.
However, voice quality is inconsistent. Some voices sound natural, but many have robotic tones or odd accents. During testing, occasional repetitive vocalizations occurred, which could be distracting.
With patience and trial, users can find smooth, decent voices, but overall, Gemini and Google’s NotebookLM outperform Qwen in this area. Google’s Audio Overviews feature, launched in NotebookLM (September 2024) and expanded to Gemini (March 2025), provides highly natural, engaging speech with conversational banter and humor.
Gemini also offers video generation, a unique advantage for learners who prefer audiovisual content over text. Qwen currently lacks this multimedia capability.
*Summary:* For full multimedia experiences (audio, video, and web), Gemini remains the most comprehensive package.
—
### The Webpage Advantage: Qwen’s Killer Feature
Beyond research quality, Qwen’s standout innovation is the fully auto-generated, live webpage output. After completing your research, Qwen converts it into a real, hosted website—not merely a PDF or a Google Doc.
These webpages feature:
– Structured headers
– Formatted tables
– Embedded citations as clickable hyperlinks
– Clean typography and responsive design
The UI mirrors the style of tools like Kimi, making pages instantly shareable and professional in appearance.
By contrast, ChatGPT users must manually copy-paste content into website builders; Gemini keeps output within documents, and Grok provides plain text.
This workflow advantage makes Qwen exceptionally appealing for academics and content creators who want polished, shareable research presentations with minimal effort.
—
**In Conclusion**, Qwen’s upgraded AI chatbot offers an impressive all-in-one research tool, combining rigorous academic-quality reports, auto-generated webpages, and multi-speaker podcast creation—all for free. While its audio narration quality trails some competitors, its unique web deployment feature and research depth make it ideal for scholars, educators, and creators seeking a comprehensive AI assistant.
Explore Qwen Chat today and experience the future of AI-driven research and multimedia content creation.
https://decrypt.co/345517/alibabas-qwen-deep-research-live-webpages-podcasts-seconds