Are Frontier Large Language Models Suitable for Q&A in Science Centres?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2412.05200v1
• Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2024 17:28:43 GMT
• Title: Are Frontier Large Language Models Suitable for Q&A in Science Centres?
• Authors: Jacob Watson, Fabrício Góes, Marco Volpe, Talles Medeiros,
• Abstract summary: This paper investigates the suitability of frontier Large Language Models (LLMs) for Q&A interactions in science centres.<n>We evaluated responses generated by three leading models: OpenAI's GPT-4, Claude 3.5 Sonnet, and Google Gemini 1.5.<n>The results revealed a trade-off between creativity and accuracy, with Claude outperforming GPT and Gemini in both maintaining clarity and engaging young audiences.
• Score: 0.4326762849037007
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: This paper investigates the suitability of frontier Large Language Models (LLMs) for Q&A interactions in science centres, with the aim of boosting visitor engagement while maintaining factual accuracy. Using a dataset of questions collected from the National Space Centre in Leicester (UK), we evaluated responses generated by three leading models: OpenAI's GPT-4, Claude 3.5 Sonnet, and Google Gemini 1.5. Each model was prompted for both standard and creative responses tailored to an 8-year-old audience, and these responses were assessed by space science experts based on accuracy, engagement, clarity, novelty, and deviation from expected answers. The results revealed a trade-off between creativity and accuracy, with Claude outperforming GPT and Gemini in both maintaining clarity and engaging young audiences, even when asked to generate more creative responses. Nonetheless, experts observed that higher novelty was generally associated with reduced factual reliability across all models. This study highlights the potential of LLMs in educational settings, emphasizing the need for careful prompt engineering to balance engagement with scientific rigor.

Related papers

• ATLAS: A High-Difficulty, Multidisciplinary Benchmark for Frontier Scientific Reasoning [118.46980291324148]
  ATLAS is a large-scale, high-difficulty, and cross-disciplinary evaluation suite composed of approximately 800 original problems.<n>Its key features include: High Originality and Contamination Resistance, with all questions newly created or substantially adapted to prevent test data leakage.<n>Preliminary results on leading models demonstrate ATLAS's effectiveness in differentiating their advanced scientific reasoning capabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-18T11:13:06Z)
• Teaching Language Models To Gather Information Proactively [53.85419549904644]
  Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly expected to function as collaborative partners.<n>In this work, we introduce a new task paradigm: proactive information gathering.<n>We design a scalable framework that generates partially specified, real-world tasks, masking key information.<n>Within this setup, our core innovation is a reinforcement finetuning strategy that rewards questions that elicit genuinely new, implicit user information.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-28T23:50:09Z)
• The Ever-Evolving Science Exam [69.20851050366643]
  We introduce the Ever-Evolving Science Exam (EESE), a dynamic benchmark designed to reliably assess scientific capabilities in foundation models.<n>Our approach consists of two components: 1) a non-public EESE-Pool with over 100K expertly constructed science instances (question-answer pairs) across 5 disciplines and 500+ subfields, built through a multi-stage pipeline ensuring Range, Reach, and Rigor, and 2) a periodically updated 500-instance subset EESE, sampled and validated to enable leakage-resilient, low-overhead evaluations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-22T12:22:16Z)
• Do Vision-Language Models Have Internal World Models? Towards an Atomic Evaluation [54.3628937181904]
  Internal world models (WMs) enable agents to understand the world's state and predict transitions.<n>Recent large Vision-Language Models (VLMs), such as OpenAI o3, GPT-4o and Gemini, exhibit potential as general-purpose WMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-27T03:24:29Z)
• Enhancing Answer Reliability Through Inter-Model Consensus of Large Language Models [1.6874375111244329]
  We propose a collaborative framework in which multiple large language models generate and answer complex, PhD-level statistical questions. Our study examines how inter-model consensus improves both response reliability and identifies the quality of the generated questions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-25T10:18:17Z)
• Networks of Networks: Complexity Class Principles Applied to Compound AI Systems Design [63.24275274981911]
  Compound AI Systems consisting of many language model inference calls are increasingly employed. In this work, we construct systems, which we call Networks of Networks (NoNs) organized around the distinction between generating a proposed answer and verifying its correctness. We introduce a verifier-based judge NoN with K generators, an instantiation of "best-of-K" or "judge-based" compound AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-23T20:40:37Z)
• AstroMLab 1: Who Wins Astronomy Jeopardy!? [4.162245706139047]
  This dataset comprises 4,425 multiple-choice questions curated from the Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics. Claude-3.5-Sonnet outperforms competitors by up to 4.6 percentage points, achieving 85.0% accuracy. Open-weights models have rapidly improved, with LLaMA-3-70b (80.6%) and Qwen-2-72b (77.7%) now competing with some of the best proprietary models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-15T19:28:14Z)
• The Battle of LLMs: A Comparative Study in Conversational QA Tasks [0.0]
  This research delves into the responses generated by ChatGPT, GPT-4, Gemini, Mixtral and Claude across different Conversational QA corpora. Evaluation scores were meticulously computed and subsequently compared to ascertain the overall performance of these models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-28T16:42:43Z)
• Exploring the Potential of the Large Language Models (LLMs) in Identifying Misleading News Headlines [2.0330684186105805]
  This study explores the efficacy of Large Language Models (LLMs) in identifying misleading versus non-misleading news headlines. Our analysis reveals significant variance in model performance, with ChatGPT-4 demonstrating superior accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-06T04:06:45Z)
• Language Models as Science Tutors [79.73256703631492]
  We introduce TutorEval and TutorChat to measure real-life usability of LMs as scientific assistants. We show that fine-tuning base models with existing dialogue datasets leads to poor performance on TutorEval. We use TutorChat to fine-tune Llemma models with 7B and 34B parameters. These LM tutors specialized in math have a 32K-token context window, and they excel at TutorEval while performing strongly on GSM8K and MATH.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-16T22:24:13Z)
• Gemini vs GPT-4V: A Preliminary Comparison and Combination of Vision-Language Models Through Qualitative Cases [98.35348038111508]
  This paper presents an in-depth comparative study of two pioneering models: Google's Gemini and OpenAI's GPT-4V(ision) The core of our analysis delves into the distinct visual comprehension abilities of each model. Our findings illuminate the unique strengths and niches of both models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-22T18:59:58Z)
• Instructed to Bias: Instruction-Tuned Language Models Exhibit Emergent Cognitive Bias [57.42417061979399]
  Recent studies show that instruction tuning (IT) and reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) improve the abilities of large language models (LMs) dramatically. In this work, we investigate the effect of IT and RLHF on decision making and reasoning in LMs. Our findings highlight the presence of these biases in various models from the GPT-3, Mistral, and T5 families.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-01T01:39:25Z)
• chatClimate: Grounding Conversational AI in Climate Science [9.043032065867536]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) still face two major challenges: hallucination and outdated information after the training phase. We present our conversational AI prototype, available at www.chatclimate.ai, and demonstrate its ability to answer challenging questions accurately. The answers and their sources were evaluated by our team of IPCC authors, who used their expert knowledge to score the accuracy of the answers from 1 (very-low) to 5 (very-high)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-11T21:31:39Z)
• RHO ($\rho$): Reducing Hallucination in Open-domain Dialogues with Knowledge Grounding [57.46495388734495]
  This paper presents RHO ($rho$) utilizing the representations of linked entities and relation predicates from a knowledge graph (KG) We propose (1) local knowledge grounding to combine textual embeddings with the corresponding KG embeddings; and (2) global knowledge grounding to equip RHO with multi-hop reasoning abilities via the attention mechanism.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-03T10:36:34Z)
• Prompting GPT-3 To Be Reliable [117.23966502293796]
  This work decomposes reliability into four facets: generalizability, fairness, calibration, and factuality. We find that GPT-3 outperforms smaller-scale supervised models by large margins on all these facets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-17T14:52:39Z)

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.