Consistency Analysis of ChatGPT

Myeongjun Erik Jang, Thomas Lukasiewicz
3/11/2023
cs.CLcs.AI

No confident code implementation found for this paper. 2 possible matches can be shown below.

Abstract

ChatGPT has gained a huge popularity since its introduction. Its positive aspects have been reported through many media platforms, and some analyses even showed that ChatGPT achieved a decent grade in professional exams, adding extra support to the claim that AI can now assist and even replace humans in industrial fields. Others, however, doubt its reliability and trustworthiness. This paper investigates the trustworthiness of ChatGPT and GPT-4 regarding logically consistent behaviour, focusing specifically on semantic consistency and the properties of negation, symmetric, and transitive consistency. Our findings suggest that while both models appear to show an enhanced language understanding and reasoning ability, they still frequently fall short of generating logically consistent predictions. We also ascertain via experiments that prompt designing, few-shot learning and employing larger large language models (LLMs) are unlikely to be the ultimate solution to resolve the inconsistency issue of LLMs.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations

No confident code match yet

We couldn't find an author-owned or strongly-evidenced community implementation for this paper. 2 weaker matches are hidden by default — verify before relying on them.

No code implementations found yet.

Know of an implementation? Let us know in the comments below!

Similar Papers

Cite this paper

@article{jang2023consistency,
  title  = {Consistency Analysis of ChatGPT},
  author = {Myeongjun Erik Jang and Thomas Lukasiewicz},
  year   = {2023},
  eprint = {2303.06273},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2303.06273v3}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/2303.06273.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2303.06273)

Discussion