Google AI and a grammar question, a report

Specific Text Questions
1

I wonder of anybody here would disagree with Google’s AI on a point of grammar.

I gave Google’s AI a question about this passage( Suetonius, The Deified Julius, XV, part 2):

quod cum praeter opinionem euenisset, senatus ob eundem coetum festinato coactus gratias ei per primores uiros egit accitumque in curiam et amplissimis uerbis conlaudatum in integrum restituit inducto priore decreto.

I asked if two verb-forms, accitumque and conlaudatum, might be instances of the supine. AI said “no”, and gave an argument referencing Allen and Greenough, the very passages I had just studied. AI says the accitumque and conlaudatum must be considered participles, rather than supines. I’m inclined to accept AI’s judgment, but on supines my Latin grammar is elementary rather than authoritative.

Here is the English translation provided by Gutenberg: “This happening contrary to expectation, the senate, who met in haste, on account of the tumult, gave him their thanks by some of the leading members of the house, and sending for him, after high commendation of his conduct, cancelled their former vote, and restored him to his office.” [link: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/6400/6400-h/6400-h.htm\]

2

They’re just participles, surely, continuing the sequence of events. eum understood from ei.

3

Many thanks. That’s exactly what Google’s AI declared. It was interesting that it could render a judgment, supported in relation to rules in a grammar book. I specifically asked if it could cite a grammatical commentary by a scholar in support of its view, and it replied, “No”. If true, this means it was applying precepts to a particular text, and not simply matching my question with answers in its database.

Anyway, I get better results when I give a reference to the text that puzzles me. I learned this earlier when the AI guessed wrong about the citation, and then readjusted when I gave the correct one.