Can ChatGPT Understand Too? A Comparative Study on ChatGPT and Fine-tuned BERT
Authors: Qihuang Zhong, Liang Ding, Juhua Liu, Bo Du, Dacheng Tao
AI-generated Key Points
- Study titled "Can ChatGPT Understand Too? A Comparative Study on ChatGPT and Fine-tuned BERT" by Qihuang Zhong, Liang Ding, Juhua Liu, Bo Du, and Dacheng Tao
- Evaluation of ChatGPT on the GLUE benchmark and comparison with four fine-tuned BERT-style models
- Findings:
- ChatGPT struggles with paraphrase and similarity tasks but excels in inference tasks
- Comparable performance to BERT in sentiment analysis and question answering tasks
- Highlighted bad cases from inference tasks indicating potential limitations of ChatGPT
- Comparative analysis provides insights into strengths and weaknesses of ChatGPT compared to fine-tuned BERT models
- Contributes to understanding language model capabilities and suggests avenues for further exploration in natural language processing technologies
Abstract: Recently, ChatGPT has attracted great attention, as it can generate fluent and high-quality responses to human inquiries. Several prior studies have shown that ChatGPT attains remarkable generation ability compared with existing models. However, the quantitative analysis of ChatGPT's understanding ability has been given little attention. In this report, we explore the understanding ability of ChatGPT 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. Additionally, several bad cases from inference tasks show the potential limitation of ChatGPT.
Tools for this paper
Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant
You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.
⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.
The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.
⚠The license of this specific paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing tools will be run using the paper metadata rather than the full article. However, it still does a good job, and you can also try our tools on papers with more open licenses.
Similar papers summarized with our AI tools
Navigate through even more similar papers through a
tree representationLook for similar papers (in beta version)
We compare the title and abstract with papers indexed in our database. For arXiv papers, we search within the same category; for DOI and other sources, we search across sources and subjects. You can rerun the search as our database grows.
Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.