Exploring the Feasibility of ChatGPT for Event Extraction

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2303.03836v2
• Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2023 17:33:31 GMT
• Title: Exploring the Feasibility of ChatGPT for Event Extraction
• Authors: Jun Gao, Huan Zhao, Changlong Yu, Ruifeng Xu
• Abstract summary: Event extraction is a fundamental task in natural language processing that involves identifying and extracting information about events mentioned in text. ChatGPT provides an opportunity to solve language tasks with simple prompts without the need for task-specific datasets and fine-tuning. We show that ChatGPT has, on average, only 51.04% of the performance of a task-specific model such as EEQA in long-tail and complex scenarios.
• Score: 31.175880361951172
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Event extraction is a fundamental task in natural language processing that involves identifying and extracting information about events mentioned in text. However, it is a challenging task due to the lack of annotated data, which is expensive and time-consuming to obtain. The emergence of large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT provides an opportunity to solve language tasks with simple prompts without the need for task-specific datasets and fine-tuning. While ChatGPT has demonstrated impressive results in tasks like machine translation, text summarization, and question answering, it presents challenges when used for complex tasks like event extraction. Unlike other tasks, event extraction requires the model to be provided with a complex set of instructions defining all event types and their schemas. To explore the feasibility of ChatGPT for event extraction and the challenges it poses, we conducted a series of experiments. Our results show that ChatGPT has, on average, only 51.04% of the performance of a task-specific model such as EEQA in long-tail and complex scenarios. Our usability testing experiments indicate that ChatGPT is not robust enough, and continuous refinement of the prompt does not lead to stable performance improvements, which can result in a poor user experience. Besides, ChatGPT is highly sensitive to different prompt styles.

Related papers

• Exploring ChatGPT's Capabilities on Vulnerability Management [56.4403395100589]
  We explore ChatGPT's capabilities on 6 tasks involving the complete vulnerability management process with a large-scale dataset containing 70,346 samples. One notable example is ChatGPT's proficiency in tasks like generating titles for software bug reports. Our findings reveal the difficulties encountered by ChatGPT and shed light on promising future directions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-11T11:01:13Z)
• HC3 Plus: A Semantic-Invariant Human ChatGPT Comparison Corpus [22.302137281411646]
  ChatGPT has garnered significant interest due to its impressive performance. There is growing concern about its potential risks. Current datasets used for detecting ChatGPT-generated text primarily focus on question-answering tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-06T05:33:57Z)
• 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)
• 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)
• ChatGPT Outperforms Crowd-Workers for Text-Annotation Tasks [0.0]
  We show that ChatGPT outperforms crowd-workers for several annotation tasks. The per-annotation cost of ChatGPT is less than $0.003 -- about twenty times cheaper than MTurk.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-27T09:59:48Z)
• Towards Making the Most of ChatGPT for Machine Translation [75.576405098545]
  ChatGPT shows remarkable capabilities for machine translation (MT) Several prior studies have shown that it achieves comparable results to commercial systems for high-resource languages.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-24T03:35:21Z)
• AugGPT: Leveraging ChatGPT for Text Data Augmentation [59.76140039943385]
  We propose a text data augmentation approach based on ChatGPT (named AugGPT) AugGPT rephrases each sentence in the training samples into multiple conceptually similar but semantically different samples. Experiment results on few-shot learning text classification tasks show the superior performance of the proposed AugGPT approach.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-25T06:58:16Z)
• Is ChatGPT a General-Purpose Natural Language Processing Task Solver? [113.22611481694825]
  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.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-08T09:44:51Z)

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.