Is ChatGPT a General-Purpose Natural Language Processing Task Solver?
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2302.06476v3
- Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2023 15:43:58 GMT
- Title: Is ChatGPT a General-Purpose Natural Language Processing Task Solver?
- Authors: Chengwei Qin, Aston Zhang, Zhuosheng Zhang, Jiaao Chen, Michihiro
Yasunaga, Diyi Yang
- Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated the ability to perform a variety of natural language processing (NLP) tasks zero-shot.
Recently, the debut of ChatGPT has drawn a great deal of attention from the natural language processing (NLP) community.
It is not yet known whether ChatGPT can serve as a generalist model that can perform many NLP tasks zero-shot.
- Score: 113.22611481694825
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
- Abstract: Spurred by advancements in scale, large language models (LLMs) have
demonstrated the ability to perform a variety of natural language processing
(NLP) tasks zero-shot -- i.e., without adaptation on downstream data. Recently,
the debut of ChatGPT has drawn a great deal of attention from the natural
language processing (NLP) community due to the fact that it can generate
high-quality responses to human input and self-correct previous mistakes based
on subsequent conversations. However, it is not yet known whether ChatGPT can
serve as a generalist model that can perform many NLP tasks zero-shot. In this
work, we empirically analyze the zero-shot learning ability of ChatGPT by
evaluating it on 20 popular NLP datasets covering 7 representative task
categories. With extensive empirical studies, we demonstrate both the
effectiveness and limitations of the current version of ChatGPT. We find that
ChatGPT performs well on many tasks favoring reasoning capabilities (e.g.,
arithmetic reasoning) while it still faces challenges when solving specific
tasks such as sequence tagging. We additionally provide in-depth analysis
through qualitative case studies.
Related papers
- Pushing the Limits of ChatGPT on NLP Tasks [79.17291002710517]
Despite the success of ChatGPT, its performances on most NLP tasks are still well below the supervised baselines.
In this work, we looked into the causes, and discovered that its subpar performance was caused by the following factors.
We propose a collection of general modules to address these issues, in an attempt to push the limits of ChatGPT on NLP tasks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-06-16T09:40:05Z) - A Systematic Study and Comprehensive Evaluation of ChatGPT on Benchmark
Datasets [19.521390684403293]
We present a thorough evaluation of ChatGPT's performance on diverse academic datasets.
Specifically, we evaluate ChatGPT across 140 tasks and analyze 255K responses it generates in these datasets.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-05-29T12:37:21Z) - ChatGPT Beyond English: Towards a Comprehensive Evaluation of Large
Language Models in Multilingual Learning [70.57126720079971]
Large language models (LLMs) have emerged as the most important breakthroughs in natural language processing (NLP)
This paper evaluates ChatGPT on 7 different tasks, covering 37 diverse languages with high, medium, low, and extremely low resources.
Compared to the performance of previous models, our extensive experimental results demonstrate a worse performance of ChatGPT for different NLP tasks and languages.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-04-12T05:08:52Z) - Comparative Analysis of CHATGPT and the evolution of language models [0.0]
This paper highlights the prevailing ideas in NLP, including machine translation, machine summarization, question-answering, and language generation.
A strategy for validating the arguments and results of ChatGPT is presented summarily as an example of safe, large-scale adoption of Large Language Models.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-03-28T03:11:28Z) - Is ChatGPT a Good NLG Evaluator? A Preliminary Study [121.77986688862302]
We provide a preliminary meta-evaluation on ChatGPT to show its reliability as an NLG metric.
Experimental results show that compared with previous automatic metrics, ChatGPT achieves state-of-the-art or competitive correlation with human judgments.
We hope our preliminary study could prompt the emergence of a general-purposed reliable NLG metric.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-03-07T16:57:20Z) - ChatGPT: Jack of all trades, master of none [4.693597927153063]
OpenAI has released the Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer (ChatGPT)
We examined ChatGPT's capabilities on 25 diverse analytical NLP tasks.
We automated ChatGPT and GPT-4 prompting process and analyzed more than 49k responses.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-02-21T15:20:37Z) - Can ChatGPT Understand Too? A Comparative Study on ChatGPT and
Fine-tuned BERT [103.57103957631067]
ChatGPT has attracted great attention, as it can generate fluent and high-quality responses to human inquiries.
We evaluate ChatGPT's understanding ability by evaluating it on the most popular GLUE benchmark, and comparing it with 4 representative fine-tuned BERT-style models.
We find that: 1) ChatGPT falls short in handling paraphrase and similarity tasks; 2) ChatGPT outperforms all BERT models on inference tasks by a large margin; 3) ChatGPT achieves comparable performance compared with BERT on sentiment analysis and question answering tasks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-02-19T12:29:33Z) - A Multitask, Multilingual, Multimodal Evaluation of ChatGPT on
Reasoning, Hallucination, and Interactivity [79.12003701981092]
We carry out an extensive technical evaluation of ChatGPT using 23 data sets covering 8 different common NLP application tasks.
We evaluate the multitask, multilingual and multi-modal aspects of ChatGPT based on these data sets and a newly designed multimodal dataset.
ChatGPT is 63.41% accurate on average in 10 different reasoning categories under logical reasoning, non-textual reasoning, and commonsense reasoning.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-02-08T12:35:34Z)
This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.
This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.