-
Noever, D.; Ciolino, M.: ¬The Turing deception (2022)
0.09
0.09385974 = sum of:
0.08326228 = product of:
0.24978682 = sum of:
0.24978682 = weight(_text_:3a in 862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.24978682 = score(doc=862,freq=2.0), product of:
0.44444627 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 862, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=862)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.010597459 = product of:
0.021194918 = sum of:
0.021194918 = weight(_text_:2 in 862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021194918 = score(doc=862,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.16371232 = fieldWeight in 862, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=862)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This research revisits the classic Turing test and compares recent large language models such as ChatGPT for their abilities to reproduce human-level comprehension and compelling text generation. Two task challenges- summary and question answering- prompt ChatGPT to produce original content (98-99%) from a single text entry and sequential questions initially posed by Turing in 1950. We score the original and generated content against the OpenAI GPT-2 Output Detector from 2019, and establish multiple cases where the generated content proves original and undetectable (98%). The question of a machine fooling a human judge recedes in this work relative to the question of "how would one prove it?" The original contribution of the work presents a metric and simple grammatical set for understanding the writing mechanics of chatbots in evaluating their readability and statistical clarity, engagement, delivery, overall quality, and plagiarism risks. While Turing's original prose scores at least 14% below the machine-generated output, whether an algorithm displays hints of Turing's true initial thoughts (the "Lovelace 2.0" test) remains unanswerable.
- Source
- https%3A%2F%2Farxiv.org%2Fabs%2F2212.06721&usg=AOvVaw3i_9pZm9y_dQWoHi6uv0EN
-
Wätjen, H.-J.: Mensch oder Maschine? : Auswahl und Erschließung vonm Informationsressourcen im Internet (1996)
0.05
0.053175673 = product of:
0.106351346 = sum of:
0.106351346 = sum of:
0.035324864 = weight(_text_:2 in 3161) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035324864 = score(doc=3161,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.27285388 = fieldWeight in 3161, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3161)
0.07102648 = weight(_text_:22 in 3161) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07102648 = score(doc=3161,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3161, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3161)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 2. 2.1996 15:40:22
-
Großjohann, K.: Gathering-, Harvesting-, Suchmaschinen (1996)
0.03
0.030133987 = product of:
0.060267974 = sum of:
0.060267974 = product of:
0.12053595 = sum of:
0.12053595 = weight(_text_:22 in 3227) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.12053595 = score(doc=3227,freq=4.0), product of:
0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.6565931 = fieldWeight in 3227, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3227)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 7. 2.1996 22:38:41
- Pages
- 22 S
-
Bates, M.J.: Designing online catalog subject acces to meet user needs (1989)
0.01
0.014129946 = product of:
0.028259892 = sum of:
0.028259892 = product of:
0.056519784 = sum of:
0.056519784 = weight(_text_:2 in 997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056519784 = score(doc=997,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.4365662 = fieldWeight in 997, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=997)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Footnote
- 37-CLASS-2-E
-
Kelm, B.: Computergestützte Sacherschließung in der Deutschen Bibliothek Frankfurt am Main (1983)
0.01
0.014129946 = product of:
0.028259892 = sum of:
0.028259892 = product of:
0.056519784 = sum of:
0.056519784 = weight(_text_:2 in 1745) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056519784 = score(doc=1745,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.4365662 = fieldWeight in 1745, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1745)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Footnote
- 49-CLAS-2-G
-
Satija, M.P.: Classification and indexing in India : a state-of-the-art (1992)
0.01
0.014129946 = product of:
0.028259892 = sum of:
0.028259892 = product of:
0.056519784 = sum of:
0.056519784 = weight(_text_:2 in 1539) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056519784 = score(doc=1539,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.4365662 = fieldWeight in 1539, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1539)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Footnote
- 3-CLASS-2-E
-
Luo, L.; Ju, J.; Li, Y.-F.; Haffari, G.; Xiong, B.; Pan, S.: ChatRule: mining logical rules with large language models for knowledge graph reasoning (2023)
0.01
0.00887831 = product of:
0.01775662 = sum of:
0.01775662 = product of:
0.03551324 = sum of:
0.03551324 = weight(_text_:22 in 1171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03551324 = score(doc=1171,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1171, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1171)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 23.11.2023 19:07:22
-
Robertson, S.E.: OKAPI at TREC-1 (1994)
0.01
0.008831216 = product of:
0.017662432 = sum of:
0.017662432 = product of:
0.035324864 = sum of:
0.035324864 = weight(_text_:2 in 7953) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035324864 = score(doc=7953,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.27285388 = fieldWeight in 7953, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=7953)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Describes the work carried out on the TREC-2 project following the results of the TREC-1 project. Experiments were conducted on the OKAPI experimental text information retrieval system which investigated a number of alternative probabilistic term weighting functions in place of the 'standard' Robertson Sparck Jones weighting functions used in TREC-1
-
Zhai, X.: ChatGPT user experience: : implications for education (2022)
0.00
0.004415608 = product of:
0.008831216 = sum of:
0.008831216 = product of:
0.017662432 = sum of:
0.017662432 = weight(_text_:2 in 849) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017662432 = score(doc=849,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.05242341 = queryNorm
0.13642694 = fieldWeight in 849, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=849)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- ChatGPT, a general-purpose conversation chatbot released on November 30, 2022, by OpenAI, is expected to impact every aspect of society. However, the potential impacts of this NLP tool on education remain unknown. Such impact can be enormous as the capacity of ChatGPT may drive changes to educational learning goals, learning activities, and assessment and evaluation practices. This study was conducted by piloting ChatGPT to write an academic paper, titled Artificial Intelligence for Education (see Appendix A). The piloting result suggests that ChatGPT is able to help researchers write a paper that is coherent, (partially) accurate, informative, and systematic. The writing is extremely efficient (2-3 hours) and involves very limited professional knowledge from the author. Drawing upon the user experience, I reflect on the potential impacts of ChatGPT, as well as similar AI tools, on education. The paper concludes by suggesting adjusting learning goals-students should be able to use AI tools to conduct subject-domain tasks and education should focus on improving students' creativity and critical thinking rather than general skills. To accomplish the learning goals, researchers should design AI-involved learning tasks to engage students in solving real-world problems. ChatGPT also raises concerns that students may outsource assessment tasks. This paper concludes that new formats of assessments are needed to focus on creativity and critical thinking that AI cannot substitute.
