GPT-3 take on the paper abstract and title: > Reviewer #2: The authors provide a complement to the original DALL-E paper, but the paper is light on empirical e

GPT-3 take on the paper abstract and title: > Reviewer #2: The authors provide a complement to the original DALL-E paper, but the paper is light on empirical evaluations. It is not clear why, for some of the prompts, the generated images are so poor and for others, they are pretty good. Why not provide a quantitative evaluation of this? (cherry picked from 10 attempts, temp=1)