Other experiments such as Prompt 2 Llama405B; plus Prompt 3 ChatGPT-4o and Mix8x22B returned answers supporting some of the textual information from spectra provided to them and were C 15 , but had incorrect numbers of Hydrogen and Oxygen (Llama405B, Mix8x22B), or an incorrect number of Oxygens (ChatGPT-4o). In addition, although ChatGPT-4o was better than 3.5 Sonnet in 2D NMR spectral image analysis from Part 1; some explanations contained general information regarding the method instead of in-depth correlations. Some of the compounds generated could be found on PubChem [21], while ChatGPT-4o assisted with obtaining molecular formulas for other compounds. In general, molecular formulas tended be lower than the The structure in Figure is an isomer of C 15 H 22 O 2 , but is missing key features such as an isopropyl group derived from the 1H-NMR spectrum, a single chiral carbon methyl, along with diasterotopic protons and other incorrect assignments for the remaining spectra. Based on the similarity of 3.5 Sonnet's molecular weights for 6 compound generations across 2 prompts shown by Figure "Best", but without an ideal molecular compound. It was determined that the initial AI image analysis performed in Part A was not sufficient enough, and therefore a manual analysis was needed to chain the high dimensional data from the 13 spectra, as shown in Figure was further investigated due to close correspondence to spectral data and was found to be an ideal candidate for solving the advanced structure determination problem.