Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2304.03325v1

Large language models, such as ChatGPT developed by OpenAI, have gained significant interest for their impressive performance on various tasks. Early adopters regard it as a disruptive technology in many fields like customer service, education, healthcare, and finance. It is essential to comprehend the opinions of these initial users to provide valuable insights into the potential strengths, weaknesses, and success or failure of the technology in different areas. Previous studies have assessed ChatGPT's performance on various tasks and found that while it performs well on most jobs, it struggles on low-resource activities and fine-grained downstream tasks like sequence tagging. Additionally, ethical considerations are being explored regarding human-computer interaction (HCI), education, medical applications and writing. This research specifically examines the responses generated by ChatGPT from different Conversational QA corpora. Conversational QA corpora aim to mimic human conversation with elements such as small talk, humor and emotion. This makes it more challenging for chatbots to reply since they need to understand not only the literal meaning of words but also context tone and intent behind them. The study employed BERT similarity scores to compare these responses with correct answers and obtain Natural Language Inference (NLI) labels. Evaluation scores were computed and compared to determine the overall performance of GPT-3 & GPT-4. The findings suggest that ChatGPT has strengths in understanding context and handling natural language while being flexible enough to handle a wide variety of topics and questions. However its lack of specific knowledge on certain topics can lead to inaccurate responses along with its difficulty in understanding ambiguous or unclear questions or statements resulting in inaccurate or nonsensical responses. In addition to identifying areas where ChatGPT may be prone to error when answering questions from Conversational QA corpora through BERT similarity scores analysis; this research also conducted a case study comparing GPT-3 & GPT-4's performance using different evaluation metrics to measure various aspects of text generation. The study found that GPT-4 was significantly enhanced compared to GPT-3 when given a context.

• - Large language models like ChatGPT developed by OpenAI have impressive performance on various tasks
• - Early adopters regard it as a disruptive technology in fields such as customer service, education, healthcare, and finance
• - Previous studies found that ChatGPT performs well on most jobs but struggles on low-resource activities and fine-grained downstream tasks like sequence tagging
• - Ethical considerations are being explored regarding human-computer interaction (HCI), education, medical applications, and writing
• - This research specifically examines the responses generated by ChatGPT from different Conversational QA corpora which mimic human conversation with elements such as small talk, humor, and emotion
• - The study employed BERT similarity scores to compare these responses with correct answers and obtain Natural Language Inference (NLI) labels for evaluation
• - Findings suggest that ChatGPT has strengths in understanding context and handling natural language while being flexible enough to handle a wide variety of topics and questions
• - However, its lack of specific knowledge on certain topics can lead to inaccurate responses along with its difficulty in understanding ambiguous or unclear questions or statements resulting in inaccurate or nonsensical responses.
• - The research also conducted a case study comparing GPT-3 & GPT-4's performance using different evaluation metrics to measure various aspects of text generation.
• - The study found that GPT-4 was significantly enhanced compared to GPT-3 when given a context.

Large language models like ChatGPT are computer programs that can do many different tasks using language. People think they will change how we do things in customer service, education, healthcare, and finance. ChatGPT is good at most jobs but not as good at some harder ones. People are thinking about how to use these programs in a way that is fair and helpful for everyone. Researchers looked at how well ChatGPT can talk like a person with small talk, humor, and emotion. They found it is good at understanding what people mean but sometimes gives wrong answers if it doesn't know enough about the topic or if the question is unclear. They also compared two different versions of ChatGPT and found one was better than the other when given more information to work with. Definitions- Large language models: computer programs that use language to do many different tasks - Customer service: helping people who buy things or use services - Healthcare: taking care of people's health - Finance: managing money - Ethical considerations: thinking about what is right and wrong when using technology - Human-computer interaction (HCI): how people use computers - Natural Language Inference (NLI): figuring out what someone means by what they say or write - Ambiguous: when something could mean more than one thing

Exploring the Performance of OpenAI's ChatGPT on Conversational QA Corpora

OpenAI’s ChatGPT has gained significant interest for its impressive performance on various tasks, with early adopters regarding it as a disruptive technology in many fields such as customer service, education, healthcare and finance. To gain valuable insights into the potential strengths and weaknesses of this technology in different areas, it is essential to understand the opinions of these initial users. This research paper examines the responses generated by ChatGPT from different Conversational QA corpora.

Background

Large language models like ChatGPT have been developed to perform various tasks with impressive accuracy. Previous studies have assessed its performance on various tasks and found that while it performs well on most jobs, it struggles on low-resource activities and fine-grained downstream tasks like sequence tagging. Additionally, ethical considerations are being explored regarding human-computer interaction (HCI), education, medical applications and writing. Conversational QA corpora aim to mimic human conversation with elements such as small talk, humor and emotion which makes it more challenging for chatbots to reply since they need to understand not only the literal meaning of words but also context tone and intent behind them.

Methodology

This study employed BERT similarity scores to compare ChatGPT responses with correct answers in order to obtain Natural Language Inference (NLI) labels. Evaluation scores were computed and compared between GPT-3 & GPT-4 using different evaluation metrics measuring various aspects of text generation.

Findings

The findings suggest that ChatGPT has strengths in understanding context and handling natural language while being flexible enough to handle a wide variety of topics and questions; however its lack of specific knowledge on certain topics can lead to inaccurate responses along with its difficulty in understanding ambiguous or unclear questions or statements resulting in inaccurate or nonsensical responses. The case study comparing GPT-3 & GPT-4's performance showed that GTPT-4 was significantly enhanced compared when given a context than when compared against GTPT-3 alone .

Conclusion

In conclusion this research paper provides valuable insight into how OpenAI’s ChatGPT performs when answering questions from Conversational QA corpora through BERT similarity scores analysis; additionally providing an interesting case study comparing GTPT 3 & 4’s performance using different evaluation metrics measuring various aspects of text generation which shows great promise for future development within this field .