Summary of Chatgpt As Research Scientist: Probing Gpt’s Capabilities As a Research Librarian, Research Ethicist, Data Generator and Data Predictor, by Steven A. Lehr et al.
ChatGPT as Research Scientist: Probing GPT’s Capabilities as a Research Librarian, Research Ethicist, Data Generator and Data Predictor
by Steven A. Lehr, Aylin Caliskan, Suneragiri Liyanage, Mahzarin R. Banaji
First submitted to arxiv on: 20 Jun 2024
Categories
- Main: Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
- Secondary: Computation and Language (cs.CL); Computers and Society (cs.CY); Information Retrieval (cs.IR); Machine Learning (cs.LG)
GrooveSquid.com Paper Summaries
GrooveSquid.com’s goal is to make artificial intelligence research accessible by summarizing AI papers in simpler terms. Each summary below covers the same AI paper, written at different levels of difficulty. The medium difficulty and low difficulty versions are original summaries written by GrooveSquid.com, while the high difficulty version is the paper’s original abstract. Feel free to learn from the version that suits you best!
| Summary difficulty | Written by | Summary |
|---|---|---|
| High | Paper authors | High Difficulty Summary Read the original abstract here |
| Medium | GrooveSquid.com (original content) | Medium Difficulty Summary The paper assesses the capabilities of ChatGPT’s GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 models as Research Librarians, Ethicists, Data Generators, and Novel Data Predictors in a psychological science context. Results indicate that GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 exhibit flawed but improving librarian skills, with GPT-4 demonstrating enhanced capacity to acknowledge its fictional references. As Research Ethicists, GPT-4 detects p-hacking violations with moderate success. In Data Generation tasks, both models replicate known cultural bias patterns in language corpora, suggesting potential for data generation and hypothesis development. However, the models struggle to predict novel empirical data, indicating limitations in their ability to aid future experimentation. |
| Low | GrooveSquid.com (original content) | Low Difficulty Summary This study looks at how good ChatGPT is at doing scientific research tasks like finding references, checking ethics, generating data, and predicting new results. The researchers tested GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 on these tasks using psychological science as an example. They found that while GPT-4 can sometimes tell when its own answers are made up, it still has trouble acknowledging mistakes. Both models can generate data with known cultural biases, but struggle to predict new results. Overall, the study suggests that ChatGPT is getting better at some tasks, but not great at predicting new scientific discoveries. |
Keywords
* Artificial intelligence * Gpt
