This paper investigates the suitability of frontier Large Language Models (LLMs) for Q&A interactions in science centres, with the aim of boosting visitor engagement while maintaining factual accuracy. Using a dataset of questions collected from the National Space Centre in Leicester (UK), we evaluated responses generated by three leading models: OpenAI's GPT-4, Claude 3.5 Sonnet, and Google Gemini 1.5. Each model was prompted for both standard and creative responses tailored to an 8-year-old audience, and these responses were assessed by space science experts based on accuracy, engagement, clarity, novelty, and deviation from expected answers. The results revealed a trade-off between creativity and accuracy, with Claude outperforming GPT and Gemini in both maintaining clarity and engaging young audiences, even when asked to generate more creative responses. Nonetheless, experts observed that higher novelty was generally associated with reduced factual reliability across all models. This study highlights the potential of LLMs in educational settings, emphasizing the need for careful prompt engineering to balance engagement with scientific rigor.

Every day people ask short questions through smart devices or online forums to seek answers to all kinds of queries. With the increasing number of questions collected it becomes difficult to provide answers to each of them, which is one of the reasons behind the growing interest in automated question answering. Some questions are similar to existing ones that have already been answered, while others could be answered by an external knowledge source such as Wikipedia. An important question is what can be revealed by analysing a large set of questions. In 2017, "We the Curious" science centre in Bristol started a project to capture the curiosity of Bristolians: the project collected more than 10,000 questions on various topics.