Chris Pearson said:

Back to the OP, I would go so far as to permit .pdf copies of BS 7671 in assessments, largely because they are easy to search, but no further.

I remember something similar in maths exams in the 70’s, slide rule permitted but definitely no calculator! 
Actually, I am with GK as well. It suits me fine to stick with books, whether the bound or electronic type. I am only reporting what I see in my classes and what other tutors are saying. A candidate can find Cmin in a matter of seconds on their smart phone without wading through a plethora of data in a mighty tome such as 7671. If you have ever flicked the pages of IS 10101, you will understand why Irish sparks avoid it like the plague! Far, far, far too much information! Bs 7671 is likely heading that way too!. 

The trouble with ai is that it states all as fact.
A colleague used ai to write a report on why solar and evse should not be on the same rcd.
The report looked to a layman as clear, factual and well explained 
A closer look revealed different editions of bs7671 had been quoted.

on one occasion it suggested safety maybe enhanced if a gfci was installed.

I suppose the way the ai is questioned will also influence the results.

Having said that I sometimes use ai and search engines to look up regulations but I always verify in the book after.

There is a general problem of creating a 'hollow professional', who does not know his/he speciality but is very good at looking stuff up quickly. 
To an extent this already happens, as even in the old days, for a particular cable type, we knew there might be a voltage drop problem, but had to either stand there and do a sum, or send 'the lad'  back to the van for the tables, if we want to be sure.
As things become less standard. more complicated electronics means more sorts of RCD, and and as per another post, switch-mode supplies mean that some loads are constant power, others are more like a resistor etc, there are more things to know, and then there are slightly arbitrary things that just have to be remembered (2.5m sockets in bathrooms, could have been 3m or two and my disappear one day), and eventually the cognitive burden becomes unreasonable for those without the memory of an elephant,  like myself. (that comma matters).

Then it becomes important to know enough of the fundamentals, to avoid foolish errors like the selection of unsuitable materials or cable routes, and then where to go to look up the final numbers. AI; and computers more generally certainly can have a big role in that, but moderated by training/knowledge and experience that has to rest between the ears of the candidate.

That legal link is quite amusing- the authentic looking 'hallucination' problem of AI has been described more pithily in other places,  including the following genuine academic reference ..

edit - the forum Software  won't let me post this link  directly so there is a tiny URL behind it.

https://research.kent.ac.uk/trust-moral-machines/learning-from-ai/

the problem is real, so perhaps we should call it what it is ;-)

(seems we cannot, at least on this forum)
Mike

mapj1 said:

There is a general problem of creating a 'hollow professional', who does not know his/he speciality but is very good at looking stuff up quickly.

Which is, in a sense, how open-book assessments (such as C&G on BS 7671) work.

I suppose that in any trade or profession, a worker knows how to do 90% of the work because it is the same day-in, day-out. Occasionally, reference materials have to be consulted. If it is an important matter, a competent and conscientious worker needs to be able to go back to the original (be it a standard, a legal case, or an article in a peer-reviewed journal) because secondary references (tutors remarks, course materials, text books, and above all, 'AI') can and do get it wrong.

A key part of understanding is being able to decide if the information you are basing your decision on is correct, such as here in the IET On-Site Guide.

Sparkingchip said:

The printed books need checking as well as the information gathered by AI, because there are counterfeit IET books that have errors and mistakes in them.

Even some non-counterfeit publications can't be trusted .... does anyone else recall Mr Cockburn's effort from a few years back?

   - Andy.

Memories, was it all that way back in 2009 we first saw 

An Illustrated Explanation of Earthed Equipotential Bonding by DW Cockburn

It is still on sale on Amazon, all 20 pages of it. It is much more entertaining than BS7671, shorter, cheaper and uses a lot of 'quotation' marks in 'odd' ways.
Its advice is however dangerously wrong in some areas, and an  example of  the sort of thing that an AI engine could well mindlessly digest and regurgitate. 

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Illustrated-Explanation-Earthed-Equipotential-Bonding/dp/1449041612?asin=1449041612&revisionId=&format=4&depth=1

Edit 

Oh I had missed the second one he wrote in 2010

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Illustrated-Explanation-Automatic-Disconnection-Supply/dp/1449055370?ref_=ast_author_dp#customerReviews

The reviews near the bottom say it all.

and, in 2025 the third, a 36 page tome, An Illustrated Explanation of Eco-Electricity 

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Illustrated-Explanation-Eco-Electricity-D-Cockburn/dp/1965875297

 I wonder how he approaches battery backed solar systems...

A set of books not for the serious Christmas stocking I think. There is no substitute for personal critical thinking.

Mike.

An Illustrated Explanation of Earthed Equipotential Bonding by DW Cockburn

I have a copy of the aforementioned book, probably a first edition, though it doesn’t come readily to hand.

HOWEVER do they need a 2391 revision 2 or an update to possibly include some of the following?
EV, PV, batteries, smart home technologies etc, no SPDs, AFDDs, bi-directional devices

What are AI hallucinations?

ChatGPT and the like have been known to make things up – and that can cause real damage.

https://theweek.com/tech/what-are-ai-hallucinations

If you use AI and it doesn’t tell you the truth and you are using dodgy reference books as well, things ain’t going to go too well.