Summary of Text and Audio Simplification: Human Vs. Chatgpt, by Gondy Leroy et al.
Text and Audio Simplification: Human vs. ChatGPT
by Gondy Leroy, David Kauchak, Philip Harber, Ankit Pal, Akash Shukla
First submitted to arxiv on: 29 Apr 2024
Categories
- Main: Computation and Language (cs.CL)
- Secondary: Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
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 This paper evaluates the performance of ChatGPT, an AI-powered tool, in simplifying healthcare-related texts and audio for improved comprehension. The authors use 14 metrics to compare human-simplified texts with those generated by ChatGPT on various corpora, including text, audio, and simplified texts produced by the online editor. The results show that simple corpora exhibit higher similarity with human-simplified texts, while ChatGPT’s simplification moves metrics in a positive direction. A medical domain expert evaluated the simplified texts and preferred the ChatGPT style, although the content retention was rated lower. This study highlights the potential of ChatGPT in healthcare information comprehension. |
| Low | GrooveSquid.com (original content) | Low Difficulty Summary This paper looks at how well ChatGPT, an AI tool, can simplify healthcare information to make it easier to understand. Researchers compared ChatGPT’s simplified texts with those done by humans using 14 different measures. They found that simple texts were more like the ones created by humans and that ChatGPT’s simplification was generally good. A medical expert reviewed the simplified texts and liked the way ChatGPT did things, but thought the information wasn’t as detailed. |
