Perbandingan Kemampuan AI Grok, ChatGPT, dan Gemini dalam Analisis Konten Media Sosial
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.28918/logiclink.v2i1.10819Abstract
This study aims to compare the capabilities of three artificial intelligence (AI) platforms—Grok (XAI), ChatGPT (OpenAI), and Gemini (Google)—in analyzing social media content, specifically on Twitter (X). A descriptive qualitative method with a case study approach was employed. Three types of content—text, images, and videos—were used as test materials. Each AI platform was tasked with analyzing sentiment, context, and meaning embedded within the content. The results indicate that Grok excels in direct integration with Twitter, enabling real-time contextual reading of posts and interactions. In contrast, ChatGPT and Gemini demonstrated superior performance in in-depth analysis and multimodal interpretation when provided with explicit input. This study provides early insights into the comparative strengths and limitations of AI platforms for social media content analysis, offering practical recommendations for researchers and practitioners in selecting appropriate AI tools for digital public opinion analysis.
Keywords:
References
Bang, Y., Cahyawijaya, S., Lee, J., & Fung, P. (2023). A multitask, multilingual, multimodal evaluation of ChatGPT on reasoning, hallucination, and bias. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.04023. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2302.04023
Buscemi, A., & Proverbio, D. (2024). ChatGPT vs Gemini vs LLaMA: Multilingual sentiment analysis benchmark. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.01715. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2402.01715
Horsuwan, T., Supnithi, T., & Sornlertlamvanich, V. (2019). Social text categorization in low-resource language using pretrained language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:1912.01580. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1912.01580
Hussain, A., & Athula, G. (2018). Usability evaluation of AI-based conversational agents. Proceedings of the Australasian Computer Science Week Multiconference. https://doi.org/10.1145/3167918.3167976
Jegham, A., Ouertani, N., & Otjacques, B. (2025). Reasoning visual LLMs with MGURU: Multi-image grounded understanding and refusal. arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.16428. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2502.16428
Jurafsky, D., & Martin, J. H. (2022). Speech and language processing (3rd ed.). Draft version. Stanford University.
Kaplan, J., McCandlish, S., Brown, T., Radford, A., & Amodei, D. (2020). Scaling laws for neural language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2001.08361. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2001.08361
Kietzmann, J. H., Hermkens, K., McCarthy, I. P., & Silvestre, B. S. (2011). Social media? Get serious! Understanding the functional building blocks of social media. Business Horizons, 54(3), 241–251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2011.01.005
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014).
Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Ramesh, A., Pavlov, M., Goh, G., Gray, S., & Sutskever, I. (2022). Zero-shot text-to-image generation. Proceedings of the 39th International Conference on Machine Learning, 139.
Statista. (2024). Number of X (formerly Twitter) users in Indonesia from 2019 to 2024. https://www.statista.com/statistics/618524/number-of-twitter-users-in-indonesia/
We Are Social. (2024). Digital 2024: Indonesia. https://wearesocial.com/id/
Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Downloads
Published
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Bernardus Herdian Nugroho
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
