Analyzing ChatGPT's Aptitude in an Introductory Computer Engineering Course

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2304.06122v2
• Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2023 13:33:42 GMT
• Title: Analyzing ChatGPT's Aptitude in an Introductory Computer Engineering Course
• Authors: Sanjay Deshpande and Jakub Szefer
• Abstract summary: ChatGPT is a tool that is able to generate plausible and human-sounding text answers to various questions. This work assesses ChatGPT's aptitude in answering quizzes, homework, exam, and laboratory questions in an introductory computer engineering course.
• Score: 6.531546527140474
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: ChatGPT has recently gathered attention from the general public and academia as a tool that is able to generate plausible and human-sounding text answers to various questions. One potential use, or abuse, of ChatGPT is in answering various questions or even generating whole essays and research papers in an academic or classroom setting. While recent works have explored the use of ChatGPT in the context of humanities, business school, or medical school, this work explores how ChatGPT performs in the context of an introductory computer engineering course. This work assesses ChatGPT's aptitude in answering quizzes, homework, exam, and laboratory questions in an introductory-level computer engineering course. This work finds that ChatGPT can do well on questions asking about generic concepts. However, predictably, as a text-only tool, it cannot handle questions with diagrams or figures, nor can it generate diagrams and figures. Further, also clearly, the tool cannot do hands-on lab experiments, breadboard assembly, etc., but can generate plausible answers to some laboratory manual questions. One of the key observations presented in this work is that the ChatGPT tool could not be used to pass all components of the course. Nevertheless, it does well on quizzes and short-answer questions. On the other hand, plausible, human-sounding answers could confuse students when generating incorrect but still plausible answers.

Related papers

• A Study on the Vulnerability of Test Questions against ChatGPT-based Cheating [14.113742357609285]
  ChatGPT can answer text prompts fairly accurately, even performing very well on postgraduate-level questions. Many educators have found that their take-home or remote tests and exams are vulnerable to ChatGPT-based cheating.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-21T23:51:06Z)
• Integrating ChatGPT in a Computer Science Course: Students Perceptions and Suggestions [0.0]
  This experience report explores students' perceptions and suggestions for integrating ChatGPT in a computer science course. Findings show the importance of carefully balancing using ChatGPT in computer science courses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-22T10:48:34Z)
• 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)
• Primacy Effect of ChatGPT [69.49920102917598]
  We study the primacy effect of ChatGPT: the tendency of selecting the labels at earlier positions as the answer. We hope that our experiments and analyses provide additional insights into building more reliable ChatGPT-based solutions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-20T00:37:28Z)
• ChatGPT: A Study on its Utility for Ubiquitous Software Engineering Tasks [2.084078990567849]
  ChatGPT (Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer) launched by OpenAI on November 30, 2022. In this study, we explore how ChatGPT can be used to help with common software engineering tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-26T11:29:06Z)
• Uncovering the Potential of ChatGPT for Discourse Analysis in Dialogue: An Empirical Study [51.079100495163736]
  This paper systematically inspects ChatGPT's performance in two discourse analysis tasks: topic segmentation and discourse parsing. ChatGPT demonstrates proficiency in identifying topic structures in general-domain conversations yet struggles considerably in specific-domain conversations. Our deeper investigation indicates that ChatGPT can give more reasonable topic structures than human annotations but only linearly parses the hierarchical rhetorical structures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-15T07:14:41Z)
• Can ChatGPT Pass An Introductory Level Functional Language Programming Course? [2.3456295046913405]
  This paper aims to explore how well ChatGPT can perform in an introductory-level functional language programming course. Our comprehensive evaluation provides valuable insights into ChatGPT's impact from both student and instructor perspectives.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-29T20:30:32Z)
• ChatGPT in the Classroom: An Analysis of Its Strengths and Weaknesses for Solving Undergraduate Computer Science Questions [5.962828109329824]
  ChatGPT is an AI language model developed by OpenAI that can understand and generate human-like text. There is concern that students may leverage ChatGPT to complete take-home assignments and exams and obtain favorable grades without genuinely acquiring knowledge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-28T17:26:32Z)
• ChatGPT is a Knowledgeable but Inexperienced Solver: An Investigation of Commonsense Problem in Large Language Models [49.52083248451775]
  Large language models (LLMs) have made significant progress in NLP. We specifically focus on ChatGPT, a widely used and easily accessible LLM. We conduct a series of experiments on 11 datasets to evaluate ChatGPT's commonsense abilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-29T03:05:43Z)
• 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)
• 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.