An Empirical Study of Using ChatGPT for Fact Verification Task

November 11, 2023 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› arXiv.org

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Mohna Chakraborty, Adithya Kulkarni, Qi Li arXiv ID 2311.06592 Category cs.IR: Information Retrieval Citations 1 Venue arXiv.org Last Checked 4 months ago
Abstract
ChatGPT has recently emerged as a powerful tool for performing diverse NLP tasks. However, ChatGPT has been criticized for generating nonfactual responses, raising concerns about its usability for sensitive tasks like fact verification. This study investigates three key research questions: (1) Can ChatGPT be used for fact verification tasks? (2) What are different prompts performance using ChatGPT for fact verification tasks? (3) For the best-performing prompt, what common mistakes does ChatGPT make? Specifically, this study focuses on conducting a comprehensive and systematic analysis by designing and comparing the performance of three different prompts for fact verification tasks on the benchmark FEVER dataset using ChatGPT.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Information Retrieval

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted