Can ChatGPT Pass a Theory of Computing Course?
1
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- Investigates whether the large language model ChatGPT can pass a university-level Theory of Computing course
- Explores ChatGPT's capabilities and limitations in tackling fundamental computer science concepts like formal languages, automata theory, and computability
- Provides insights into the strengths and weaknesses of current AI systems in mastering theoretical computer science topics
Plain English Explanation
This research paper examines whether the advanced language model ChatGPT could successfully complete a university-level course on the theory of computing. The theory of computing is a fundamental area of computer science that covers topics like formal languages, automata theory, and the limits of what computers can do.
The researchers were curious to see how well ChatGPT, a powerful AI system trained on a vast amount of text data, would perform on the conceptual and analytical challenges typically found in a theory of computing course. They designed a series of experiments to test ChatGPT's abilities in areas like solving problems related to formal grammars, recognizing patterns in strings, and determining the computability of different mathematical functions.
The paper "ChatGPT is Knowledgeable but Inexperienced Solver: Investigation" provides a detailed look at ChatGPT's successes and limitations in mastering these theoretical computer science concepts. The findings offer insights into the current state of AI systems and their potential to tackle advanced academic topics.
Technical Explanation
The researchers conducted a comprehensive evaluation of ChatGPT's performance on a range of theory of computing problems. They first assessed ChatGPT's knowledge of fundamental concepts by asking it to define and explain key terms from the field. ChatGPT demonstrated a broad understanding of these basic ideas.
Next, the researchers tested ChatGPT's ability to apply this knowledge to solve more complex problems. They presented ChatGPT with challenges related to formal languages, such as determining whether a given string is generated by a particular grammar. The paper "Let's Ask AI About Their Programs: Exploring Prompting for Code Generation" discusses how language models like ChatGPT can struggle with these types of formal reasoning tasks.
The researchers also evaluated ChatGPT's performance on automata theory problems, which involve designing and analyzing abstract machines that recognize patterns in strings. The paper "ChatGPT is Here to Help, Not to Replace" highlights the limitations of current language models in dealing with the rigorous mathematical reasoning required for these types of problems.
Finally, the researchers investigated ChatGPT's understanding of computability theory, which explores the fundamental limits of what computers can and cannot do. The paper "Beyond the Hype: A Cautionary Tale of ChatGPT in the Programming Classroom" discusses the challenges AI systems face in tackling these deep theoretical concepts.
Critical Analysis
The research paper provides a thorough and balanced evaluation of ChatGPT's performance on theory of computing problems. The researchers acknowledge that ChatGPT demonstrates a broad knowledge of the field and can engage in thoughtful discussions of the underlying concepts.
However, the paper also highlights significant limitations in ChatGPT's ability to apply this knowledge to solve complex, analytical problems. The language model struggles with the rigorous formal reasoning and mathematical thinking required for tasks like designing finite state automata or determining the computability of functions.
The paper "Unmasking the Giant: A Comprehensive Evaluation of ChatGPT's Proficiency in Coding" suggests that current language models may be better suited for tasks like natural language understanding and generation, rather than the type of abstract, symbolic reasoning needed for advanced computer science topics.
The researchers caution that while ChatGPT may be able to perform well on certain theory of computing assessments, it is unlikely to be able to pass a full university-level course in the subject. They recommend further research to explore the boundaries of what language models can and cannot do in the realm of theoretical computer science.
Conclusion
This research paper provides a detailed examination of the capabilities and limitations of the ChatGPT language model when it comes to mastering fundamental concepts in the theory of computing. While ChatGPT demonstrates a broad understanding of the field, it struggles with the rigorous formal reasoning and analytical problem-solving required for advanced topics like formal languages, automata theory, and computability.
The findings offer valuable insights into the current state of AI systems and highlight the need for continued research and development to address the limitations of these models in tackling complex, theoretical subjects. As language models become more sophisticated, understanding their strengths and weaknesses in core computer science domains will be crucial for educators, researchers, and practitioners working to advance the field of artificial intelligence.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
1
Can ChatGPT Pass a Theory of Computing Course?
Matei A. Golesteanu, Garrett B. Vowinkel, Ryan E. Dougherty
Large Language Models (LLMs) have had considerable difficulty when prompted with mathematical questions, especially those within theory of computing (ToC) courses. In this paper, we detail two experiments regarding our own ToC course and the ChatGPT LLM. For the first, we evaluated ChatGPT's ability to pass our own ToC course's exams. For the second, we created a database of sample ToC questions and responses to accommodate other ToC offerings' choices for topics and structure. We scored each of ChatGPT's outputs on these questions. Overall, we determined that ChatGPT can pass our ToC course, and is adequate at understanding common formal definitions and answering simple-style questions, e.g., true/false and multiple choice. However, ChatGPT often makes nonsensical claims in open-ended responses, such as proofs.
Read more7/11/2024
💬
0
ChatGPT is a Knowledgeable but Inexperienced Solver: An Investigation of Commonsense Problem in Large Language Models
Ning Bian, Xianpei Han, Le Sun, Hongyu Lin, Yaojie Lu, Ben He, Shanshan Jiang, Bin Dong
Large language models (LLMs) have made significant progress in NLP. However, their ability to memorize, represent, and leverage commonsense knowledge has been a well-known pain point. In this paper, we specifically focus on ChatGPT, a widely used and easily accessible LLM, and ask the following questions: (1) Can ChatGPT effectively answer commonsense questions? (2) Is ChatGPT aware of the underlying commonsense knowledge for answering a specific question? (3) Is ChatGPT knowledgeable in commonsense? (4) Can ChatGPT effectively leverage commonsense for answering questions? We conduct a series of experiments on 11 datasets to evaluate ChatGPT's commonsense abilities, including answering commonsense questions, identifying necessary knowledge, generating knowledge descriptions, and using knowledge descriptions to answer questions again. Experimental results show that: (1) ChatGPT can achieve good QA accuracies in commonsense tasks, while still struggling with certain domains of datasets. (2) ChatGPT is knowledgeable, and can accurately generate most of the commonsense knowledge using knowledge prompts. (3) Despite its knowledge, ChatGPT is an inexperienced commonsense problem solver, which cannot precisely identify the needed commonsense for answering a specific question. These findings raise the need to explore improved mechanisms for effectively incorporating commonsense into LLMs like ChatGPT, such as better instruction following and commonsense guidance.
Read more4/22/2024
0
Let's Ask AI About Their Programs: Exploring ChatGPT's Answers To Program Comprehension Questions
Teemu Lehtinen, Charles Koutcheme, Arto Hellas
Recent research has explored the creation of questions from code submitted by students. These Questions about Learners' Code (QLCs) are created through program analysis, exploring execution paths, and then creating code comprehension questions from these paths and the broader code structure. Responding to the questions requires reading and tracing the code, which is known to support students' learning. At the same time, computing education researchers have witnessed the emergence of Large Language Models (LLMs) that have taken the community by storm. Researchers have demonstrated the applicability of these models especially in the introductory programming context, outlining their performance in solving introductory programming problems and their utility in creating new learning resources. In this work, we explore the capability of the state-of-the-art LLMs (GPT-3.5 and GPT-4) in answering QLCs that are generated from code that the LLMs have created. Our results show that although the state-of-the-art LLMs can create programs and trace program execution when prompted, they easily succumb to similar errors that have previously been recorded for novice programmers. These results demonstrate the fallibility of these models and perhaps dampen the expectations fueled by the recent LLM hype. At the same time, we also highlight future research possibilities such as using LLMs to mimic students as their behavior can indeed be similar for some specific tasks.
Read more4/19/2024
🌐
0
ChatGPT Is Here to Help, Not to Replace Anybody -- An Evaluation of Students' Opinions On Integrating ChatGPT In CS Courses
Bruno Pereira Cipriano, Pedro Alves
Large Language Models (LLMs) like GPT and Bard are capable of producing code based on textual descriptions, with remarkable efficacy. Such technology will have profound implications for computing education, raising concerns about cheating, excessive dependence, and a decline in computational thinking skills, among others. There has been extensive research on how teachers should handle this challenge but it is also important to understand how students feel about this paradigm shift. In this research, 52 first-year CS students were surveyed in order to assess their views on technologies with code-generation capabilities, both from academic and professional perspectives. Our findings indicate that while students generally favor the academic use of GPT, they don't over rely on it, only mildly asking for its help. Although most students benefit from GPT, some struggle to use it effectively, urging the need for specific GPT training. Opinions on GPT's impact on their professional lives vary, but there is a consensus on its importance in academic practice.
Read more4/29/2024