3 ms·

Does anyone have experience with how Bard compares to ChatGPT-4? If ChatGPT-4 is on the verge of usefulness for a layperson, is it worth spending time with Bard

Does anyone have experience with how Bard compares to ChatGPT-4? If ChatGPT-4 is on the verge of usefulness for a layperson, is it worth spending time with Bard?

gaogao 3y ago
Bard doesn't even best 3.5 save for having knowledge base lookups
- SparkyMcUnicorn 3y ago
  I haven't used bard for a few weeks or so now, but tried it again today. It's drastically improved, although I haven't done a lot of comparison yet. Some of my go-to prompts yielded results that are (in my opinion) competitive with GPT-4. Edit: Just ran into a situation where Bard uses `typeof something === "array"` in some generated code, and although it acknowledges that typeof in javascript never returns "array", it doesn't see it as a problem in the code that it provided to me.
gniv 3y ago
The new model used by Bard might be competitive with GPT-4 according to Google's tests: https://ai.google/static/documents/palm2techreport.pdf https://ai.google/static/documents/palm2techreport.pdf (search for GPT-4).
dougmwne 3y ago
So far Bard has been very behind GPT-4 and very prone to hallucinations. It feels much more like talking to an autocomplete keyboard than a baby-AGI like GPT-4. Hopefully this PaLM 2 model closes the gap, because the gap in a large.
ck_one 3y ago
Code generation works better for me compared to GPT-4 and it's a lot faster.
execveat 3y ago
Not even close. I'd prefer local WizardLM/Vicuna to this Artificial Idiot. The funniest to me is that one of the examples they suggest you try is asking questions about google/jax repo, which kinda suggest that Bart can index source code from GitHub. Well, it fails even at listing directory structure and completely hallucinates all following answers! I'm not sure why Google would bother releasing Bart in this state. It's made me lose respect for their AI competency.
- SparkyMcUnicorn 3y ago
  Best to worst, I'd rate them in the order of GPT-4, Wizard/Vicuna mix, then Bard. Maybe I'm prompting differently than other people, but I find them all give satisfactory answers. Bard does seem to be getting confused during conversations and has trouble following, but improvements are noticeable from a few weeks ago. For some prompts I'd say its similar to GPT-4, and it has much newer information (appears to be semi-connected to the internet) which is really handy, but it definitely needs some work still. Example of "semi-connected to the internet": I asked Bard the about the current weather in one place and it gave me accurate current info, but for somewhere else it gave me "as of 10AM EST".
joshvm 3y ago
It's not as good yet, but ChatGPT (et al) has likely benefited a lot from extensive user interaction and feedback (which can be fed back into fine-tuning). I doubt they could get such diverse user responses without opening up to the public (even with their internal/outsourced RLHF).
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

Does anyone have experience with how Bard compares to ChatGPT-4? If ChatGPT-4 is on the verge of usefulness for a layperson, is it worth spending time with Bard?

gaogao 3y ago

Bard doesn't even best 3.5 save for having knowledge base lookups

SparkyMcUnicorn 3y ago
I haven't used bard for a few weeks or so now, but tried it again today. It's drastically improved, although I haven't done a lot of comparison yet. Some of my go-to prompts yielded results that are (in my opinion) competitive with GPT-4. Edit: Just ran into a situation where Bard uses `typeof something === "array"` in some generated code, and although it acknowledges that typeof in javascript never returns "array", it doesn't see it as a problem in the code that it provided to me.

gniv 3y ago

The new model used by Bard might be competitive with GPT-4 according to Google's tests: https://ai.google/static/documents/palm2techreport.pdf https://ai.google/static/documents/palm2techreport.pdf (search for GPT-4).

dougmwne 3y ago

So far Bard has been very behind GPT-4 and very prone to hallucinations. It feels much more like talking to an autocomplete keyboard than a baby-AGI like GPT-4. Hopefully this PaLM 2 model closes the gap, because the gap in a large.

ck_one 3y ago

Code generation works better for me compared to GPT-4 and it's a lot faster.

execveat 3y ago

Not even close. I'd prefer local WizardLM/Vicuna to this Artificial Idiot. The funniest to me is that one of the examples they suggest you try is asking questions about google/jax repo, which kinda suggest that Bart can index source code from GitHub. Well, it fails even at listing directory structure and completely hallucinates all following answers! I'm not sure why Google would bother releasing Bart in this state. It's made me lose respect for their AI competency.

SparkyMcUnicorn 3y ago
Best to worst, I'd rate them in the order of GPT-4, Wizard/Vicuna mix, then Bard. Maybe I'm prompting differently than other people, but I find them all give satisfactory answers. Bard does seem to be getting confused during conversations and has trouble following, but improvements are noticeable from a few weeks ago. For some prompts I'd say its similar to GPT-4, and it has much newer information (appears to be semi-connected to the internet) which is really handy, but it definitely needs some work still. Example of "semi-connected to the internet": I asked Bard the about the current weather in one place and it gave me accurate current info, but for somewhere else it gave me "as of 10AM EST".

joshvm 3y ago

It's not as good yet, but ChatGPT (et al) has likely benefited a lot from extensive user interaction and feedback (which can be fed back into fine-tuning). I doubt they could get such diverse user responses without opening up to the public (even with their internal/outsourced RLHF).

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]