A Categorical Archive of ChatGPT Failures

AI-generated keywords: ChatGPT LLMs Limitations Biases Knowledge Base

AI-generated Key Points

  • Large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT have proven valuable in various fields
  • ChatGPT can simulate human conversation and generate appropriate responses
  • ChatGPT's ability to answer a broad range of human inquiries surpasses prior public chatbots in both security and usefulness
  • A comprehensive analysis of ChatGPT's failures is lacking
  • Ten categories of failures exhibited by ChatGPT are presented, including reasoning, factual errors, math, coding, and bias
  • The risks, limitations, and societal implications of ChatGPT are highlighted
  • LLMs like ChatGPT have limitations and can often generate incorrect information
  • Efforts are ongoing to formulate standardized sets of questions to track the progress made by these models over time
  • It is necessary for researchers and developers to address these limitations while enhancing future language models and chatbots' development
  • This will maximize their potentials while minimizing risks associated with them such as bias or incorrect information generation.
Also access our AI generated: Comprehensive summary, Lay summary, Blog-like article; or ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant.

Authors: Ali Borji

License: CC BY 4.0

Abstract: Large language models have been demonstrated to be valuable in different fields. ChatGPT, developed by OpenAI, has been trained using massive amounts of data and simulates human conversation by comprehending context and generating appropriate responses. It has garnered significant attention due to its ability to effectively answer a broad range of human inquiries, with fluent and comprehensive answers surpassing prior public chatbots in both security and usefulness. However, a comprehensive analysis of ChatGPT's failures is lacking, which is the focus of this study. Ten categories of failures, including reasoning, factual errors, math, coding, and bias, are presented and discussed. The risks, limitations, and societal implications of ChatGPT are also highlighted. The goal of this study is to assist researchers and developers in enhancing future language models and chatbots.

Submitted to arXiv on 06 Feb. 2023

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

AI assistant instructions?

Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2302.03494v1

Large language models (LLMs) have proven to be valuable in various fields, and ChatGPT, developed by OpenAI, is a prime example of this. It has been trained using massive amounts of data and can simulate human conversation by comprehending context and generating appropriate responses. ChatGPT's ability to answer a broad range of human inquiries with fluent and comprehensive answers surpasses prior public chatbots in both security and usefulness. However, despite its impressive capabilities, a comprehensive analysis of ChatGPT's failures is lacking. This study aims to fill that gap by presenting ten categories of failures exhibited by ChatGPT, including reasoning, factual errors, math, coding, and bias. The risks, limitations, and societal implications of ChatGPT are also highlighted. While LLMs like ChatGPT have proven useful in several areas such as conversational agents, education, explainable AI, text summarization, information retrieval among others; they are not without their limitations and can often generate incorrect information. To fully leverage their capabilities it is crucial to acknowledge their limitations and biases in their generated output. To accurately assess the performance of these models over time instead of relying on subjective opinions; some efforts are ongoing in formulating standardized sets of questions which will track the progress made by these models over time. Ernest Davis has proposed such question sets for testing the knowledge base used by large language models like GPT-3. While future studies may enhance our understanding of LLMs' capabilities further; it is essential to recognize that these models are not infallible. As outlined by Ali Borji's GitHub repository on ChatGPT failures; it is necessary for researchers and developers to address these limitations while enhancing future language models and chatbots' development in order to maximize their potentials while minimizing risks associated with them such as bias or incorrect information generation.
Created on 24 Apr. 2023

Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting

Score: 0

Why do we need votes?

Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.

The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.

Similar papers summarized with our AI tools

Navigate through even more similar papers through a

tree representation

Look for similar papers (in beta version)

By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.

Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.