Have all AI chatbots imitated ChatGPT? Or are they influencing each other?

The rise of ChatGPT in late 2022 triggered a wave of new AI chatbots across nearly every major tech company. From Google’s Gemini to Meta AI, xAI’s Grok, Anthropic’s Claude, and Microsoft’s Copilot, the sudden burst of conversational AI tools has often looked like a race to match what ChatGPT made mainstream.

But the story is more complex than simple imitation — it’s a cycle of shared influence, with each tool shaping and reacting to the others.

Chatbots have clearly imitated ChatGPT — in interface and design

When ChatGPT launched, it introduced an easy-to-use chat interface powered by a fine-tuned large language model (LLM), using reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF). That formula — chat UI + LLM + human feedback — became the new standard. Many competitors quickly adopted similar structures:

• Google’s Bard (now Gemini) arrived months later with a similar look and feel.

• Microsoft’s Copilot (formerly Bing Chat) used the same GPT model under the hood and mimicked the same prompt-based interaction.

• Meta AI, Grok, Claude, and even open-source tools like Mistral and DeepSeek adopted a comparable conversational format, RLHF alignment, and chatbot personalities.

In this sense, yes — many AI tools have clearly taken cues from ChatGPT, especially in how they present themselves and interact with users.

But ChatGPT itself was built on earlier ideas

While ChatGPT popularized the chatbot-as-assistant format, it did not invent it. Several key components were inherited or adapted from earlier work:

• Transformer architecture: Developed by Google in 2017, the Transformer is the core architecture that powers GPT models.

• RLHF: OpenAI’s own earlier research in 2017-2020 developed this method — which ChatGPT later scaled and refined.

• Previous chatbots: Google’s LaMDA (2021), Microsoft’s Xiaoice (2014), and even virtual assistants like Siri and Alexa laid the groundwork for conversational agents long before ChatGPT existed.

So, while ChatGPT looks like a revolution, it’s also the result of years of incremental progress — combining and polishing prior breakthroughs.

All major AI tools now influence each other

Since ChatGPT’s debut, the entire AI chatbot landscape has become a feedback loop:

• Google's Gemini integrates code execution and multimodal features, likely in response to GPT-4 and its tool use.

• OpenAI added vision, voice, and file handling to GPT-4o, following pressure from Claude and Gemini’s multimodal demos.

• xAI’s Grok tries to differentiate by integrating X (Twitter) feeds, which pushes others to rethink real-time integration.

Every new feature from one chatbot prompts adjustments from others. Improvements spread quickly, and models converge toward whatever proves effective. It’s no longer a one-way street — innovation flows in multiple directions, and tools constantly iterate based on what users come to expect.

Could AI chatbots become indistinguishable from each other if they keep copying features?

It’s a fair concern—given how quickly each chatbot adopts the innovations of competitors, a logical worry emerges: Will all AI chatbots eventually look and feel the same?

In the short term, yes, the risk is real. When ChatGPT introduced RLHF-trained conversational abilities, dozens of new AI chatbots emerged with remarkably similar interfaces and behaviors.

Features that were once unique—like code generation, multimodal inputs (images and voice), or real-time web browsing—quickly spread across tools. This fast replication can make chatbots hard to differentiate, especially for casual users.

But despite this initial convergence, there’s a natural limit to how much AI tools can mimic each other without losing their distinctive value. Companies are already exploring specialized roles and unique integrations. For example:

• Microsoft Copilot is deeply embedding itself within Office productivity tools, becoming distinctly tied to workplace efficiency.

• Google Gemini is leveraging its deep integration with Google Search and Workspace, differentiating through seamless web knowledge and cross-product collaboration.

• Meta AI emphasizes social context and real-time messaging integration within platforms like WhatsApp and Instagram, making interactions uniquely personalized.

Thus, while foundational features may become common across chatbots, the way each tool integrates into users’ daily lives will maintain significant differentiation. Ultimately, users will choose AI tools based on the context and ecosystems they prefer, ensuring chatbots won’t become entirely indistinguishable.

Is the rapid copying of features in AI chatbots ethically problematic?

At face value, copying features might seem ethically questionable—especially in creative or commercial contexts. But in the realm of AI research, copying is a nuanced and often necessary aspect of innovation.

First, consider that most foundational advancements—like the Transformer architecture, developed by Google in 2017—were deliberately shared openly through academic papers. The open nature of this research was intentional, aiming to foster rapid innovation and collective improvement. In AI, building openly on each other’s work is standard practice, often seen as a virtue rather than a flaw.

However, ethical questions emerge primarily in how closely commercial products mimic unique interfaces, features, or brand identities of competitors. For example, when companies launch nearly identical user experiences, they risk crossing ethical boundaries concerning intellectual property or user confusion.

But the AI field itself thrives on a collective knowledge model, encouraging researchers and companies to openly borrow and build upon each other’s methods. This openness has driven rapid innovation, significantly accelerating progress in AI capability and accessibility. In short, ethical issues arise primarily in how copied features are marketed or presented, rather than in the copying itself. Most AI researchers and companies accept that mutual inspiration is intrinsic to the field’s advancement.

Could constant imitation among AI chatbots slow down true innovation?

It’s possible to argue that excessive imitation could hinder truly groundbreaking innovation. If companies consistently chase after each other’s features, will genuine breakthroughs become rarer?

Initially, the rush to copy successful features—like conversational AI’s intuitive interfaces and multimodal inputs—has accelerated short-term innovation. Companies quickly iterate, improving user experiences and expanding capabilities. But over time, excessive focus on mimicry can lead to incremental rather than revolutionary improvements, potentially diverting resources away from original research and high-risk experiments.

On the other hand, AI competition itself can actually push the boundaries of innovation faster. For instance, ChatGPT’s early popularity compelled Google and Microsoft to speed up development of ambitious multimodal AI. Similarly, open-source alternatives have pushed major companies to improve transparency, alignment, and accessibility.

The best scenario is a balanced dynamic—where imitation helps establish baseline standards and usability, but ongoing competition simultaneously drives bold, risk-taking innovation. Indeed, historically, technological revolutions often unfold precisely this way: initial imitation is intense, followed by diversification as products mature and companies explore unique value propositions.

So... imitation among AI chatbots will likely continue to coexist with meaningful innovation, pushing the entire ecosystem forward rather than slowing it down.

_______

FOLLOW US FOR MORE.

DATA STUDIOS

datastudios.org