• Amoeba_Girl@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    From Re-evaluating GPT-4’s bar exam performance (linked in the article):

    First, although GPT-4’s UBE score nears the 90th percentile when examining approximate conversions from February administrations of the Illinois Bar Exam, these estimates are heavily skewed towards repeat test-takers who failed the July administration and score significantly lower than the general test-taking population.

    Ohhh, that is sneaky!

    • Amoeba_Girl@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      What I find delightful about this is that I already wasn’t impressed! Because, as the paper goes on to say

      Moreover, although the UBE is a closed-book exam for humans, GPT-4’s huge training corpus largely distilled in its parameters means that it can effectively take the UBE “open-book”

      And here I was thinking it not getting a perfect score on multiple-choice questions was already damning. But apparently it doesn’t even get a particularly good score!

      • EatATaco@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Why is that a criticism? This is how it works for humans too: we study, we learn the stuff, and then try to recall it during tests. We’ve been trained on the data too, for neither a human nor an ai would be able to do well on the test without learning it first.

        This is part of what makes ai so “scary” that it can basically know so much.

          • EatATaco@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            I guess it comes down to a philosophical question as to what “know” actually means.

            But from my perspective is that it certainly knows some things. It knows how to determine what I’m asking, and it clearly knows how to formulate a response by stitching together information. Is it perfect? No. But neither are humans, we mistakenly believe we know things all the time, and miscommunications are quite common.

            But this is why I asked the follow up question…what’s the effective difference? Don’t get me wrong, they clearly have a lot of flaws right now. But my 8 year old had a lot of flaws too, and I assume both will get better with age.