4 ms·
Seriously, you cherry picked the paragraph you use to cite your opinion, which contrary to the finding of the article itself and completely ignore the the first
by NemoNobody 3y ago
Seriously, you cherry picked the paragraph you use to cite your opinion, which contrary to the finding of the article itself and completely ignore the the first part of the second sentence of your paragraph "for a task selected outside the frontier" - so, something beyond the capabilities of AI at this time ONLY decreased their correct solutions 19 percentage points.
43% better it made below average people, 17% better it made above average people.
Same paragraph.
- steve1977 3y agoBCG consultants. Not average people.
- datadrivenangel 3y agoYou know, I missed that part. Oops. Looking into the full paper, it looks like the task identified inside the frontier is much more broken down, with 18 numbered steps. The outside the frontier task is two bullet points. So for clearly scoped tasks, ChatGPT is hands down good. For less well scoped work it reduces quality. Interestingly, the authors also looked at the amount of text retained from ChatGPT, and found that people who received ChatGPT training ended up retaining a larger portion of the ChatGPT output in their final answers and performed better in the quality assessment.