Non-native speakers of English or ChatGPT: Who thinks better?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2412.00457v1
• Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2024 12:04:25 GMT
• Title: Non-native speakers of English or ChatGPT: Who thinks better?
• Authors: Mohammed Q. Shormani,
• Abstract summary: The study concludes that human brain's ability to process and interpret natural language data is unique. Fifteen non-native speakers of English were recruited for the study. A center-embedding English sentence was presented to both the study participants and ChatGPT.
• Score: 0.0
• License:
• Abstract: This study sets out to answer one major question: Who thinks better, non-native speakers of English or ChatGPT?, providing evidence from processing and interpreting center-embedding English constructions that human brain surpasses ChatGPT, and that ChatGPT cannot be regarded as a theory of language. Fifteen non-native speakers of English were recruited as participants of the study. A center-embedding English sentence was presented to both the study participants and ChatGPT. The study findings unveil that human brain is still far ahead of Large Language Models, specifically ChatGPT, even in the case of non-native speakers of an L2, here English. The study concludes that human brain's ability to process and interpret natural language data is unique and that ChatGPT still lags behind this human unique ability.

Related papers

• Grammaticality Representation in ChatGPT as Compared to Linguists and Laypeople [0.0]
  This study builds upon a previous study that collected laypeople's grammatical judgments on 148 linguistic phenomena. Our primary focus was to compare ChatGPT with both laypeople and linguists in the judgement of these linguistic constructions. Overall, our findings demonstrate convergence rates ranging from 73% to 95% between ChatGPT and linguists, with an overall point-estimate of 89%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-17T00:23:16Z)
• Complementary Advantages of ChatGPTs and Human Readers in Reasoning: Evidence from English Text Reading Comprehension [12.240611073541597]
  ChatGPT has shown its great power in text processing, including its reasoning ability from text reading. There has not been any direct comparison between human readers and ChatGPT in reasoning ability related to text reading. This study was undertaken to investigate how ChatGPTs and Chinese senior school students exhibited their reasoning ability from English narrative texts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-17T06:13:02Z)
• Counting the Bugs in ChatGPT's Wugs: A Multilingual Investigation into the Morphological Capabilities of a Large Language Model [23.60677380868016]
  Large language models (LLMs) have recently reached an impressive level of linguistic capability, prompting comparisons with human language skills. Here, we conduct the first rigorous analysis of the morphological capabilities of ChatGPT in four typologically varied languages. We find that ChatGPT massively underperforms purpose-built systems, particularly in English.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-23T17:21:03Z)
• 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)
• Emergence of a phonological bias in ChatGPT [0.0]
  I demonstrate that ChatGPT displays phonological biases that are a hallmark of human language processing. ChatGPT has a tendency to use consonants over vowels to identify words. This is observed across languages that differ in their relative distribution of consonants and vowels such as English and Spanish.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-25T10:57:43Z)
• Does ChatGPT have Theory of Mind? [2.3129337924262927]
  Theory of Mind (ToM) is the ability to understand human thinking and decision-making. This paper investigates what extent recent Large Language Models in the ChatGPT tradition possess ToM.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-23T12:55:21Z)
• Phoenix: Democratizing ChatGPT across Languages [68.75163236421352]
  We release a large language model "Phoenix", achieving competitive performance among open-source English and Chinese models. We believe this work will be beneficial to make ChatGPT more accessible, especially in countries where people cannot use ChatGPT due to restrictions from OpenAI or local goverments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-20T16:50:04Z)
• 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)
• 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)
• A Categorical Archive of ChatGPT Failures [47.64219291655723]
  ChatGPT, developed by OpenAI, has been trained using massive amounts of data and simulates human conversation. It has garnered significant attention due to its ability to effectively answer a broad range of human inquiries. However, a comprehensive analysis of ChatGPT's failures is lacking, which is the focus of this study.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-06T04:21:59Z)

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.