Evaluation on ChatGPT for Chinese Language Understanding
Data Intelligence, ISSN: 2641-435X, Vol: 5, Issue: 4, Page: 885-903
2023
- 14Citations
- 43Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
ChatGPT has attracted extension attention of academia and industry. This paper aims to evaluate ChatGPT in Chinese language understanding capability on 6 tasks using 11 datasets. Experiments indicate that ChatGPT achieved competitive results in sentiment analysis, summary, and reading comprehension in Chinese, while it is prone to factual errors in closed-book QA. Further, on two more difficult Chinese understanding tasks, that is, idiom fill-in-the-blank and cants understanding, we found that a simple chain-of-thought prompt can improve the accuracy of ChatGPT in complex reasoning. This paper further analyses the possible risks of using ChatGPT based on the results. Finally, we briefly describe the research and development progress of our ChatBIT.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85179658086&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/dint_a_00232; https://www.sciengine.com/doi/10.1162/dint_a_00232; https://dx.doi.org/10.1162/dint_a_00232; https://direct.mit.edu/dint/article/5/4/885/117502/Evaluation-on-ChatGPT-for-Chinese-Language
China Science Publishing & Media Ltd.
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know