Cited by 612Speech and dialogue systemsTopic ModelingNatural Language Processing Techniques

The benefits and challenges of chatgpt: An overview

Open access
Deng, Jianyang, Lin, Yijia·2023·Frontiers in Computing and Intelligent Systems

Abstract

This paper provides an overview of ChatGPT, a natural language processing (NLP) system developed by Open AI. It discusses the features of ChatGPT, its benefits, and its challenges. The paper also provides an analysis of the potential applications of ChatGPT and its limitations. The paper concludes that ChatGPT is a powerful NLP system that can generate human-like conversations, but it has some challenges that must be addressed.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.54097/fcis.v2i2.4465

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • ChatGPT, among other LLMs, can be beneficial in conversational and writing tasks, assisting to increase the efficiency and accuracy of the required output.

    “On one hand, ChatGPT, among other LLMs, can be beneficial in conversational and writing tasks, assisting to increase the efficiency and accuracy of the required output [11].”

    From ChatGPT Utility in Healthcare Education, Research, and Practice: Systematic Review on the Promising Perspectives and Valid Concerns (2023) · cites this paper as [11]

    Sections 4.1 (Increased Efficiency) and 4.2 (Improved Accuracy) say ChatGPT can make conversations more efficient and generate more accurate responses. The paper does not establish those benefits for writing tasks or for other LLMs, so the broader claim is only partially supported. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Concerns have been raised that possible bias based on the datasets used in ChatGPT training can limit its capabilities and could result in factual inaccuracies that appear scientifically plausible (hallucination).

    “On the other hand, concerns have been raised in relation to possible bias based on the datasets used in ChatGPT training, which can limit its capabilities and could result in factual inaccuracies, but alarmingly appear to be scientifically plausible (a phenomenon termed hallucination) [11].”

    From ChatGPT Utility in Healthcare Education, Research, and Practice: Systematic Review on the Promising Perspectives and Valid Concerns (2023) · cites this paper as [11]

    Section 5.2, “Limited Capabilities” (page unavailable), says ChatGPT’s training dataset may lead to biased responses and that it may provide inaccurate information. It does not say that dataset bias causes factual inaccuracies, or that those inaccuracies appear scientifically plausible; the retrieved passages do not describe hallucination. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Security concerns and the potential of cyber-attacks with the spread of misinformation utilizing LLMs should be considered.

    “Additionally, security concerns and the potential of cyber-attacks with the spread of misinformation utilizing LLMs should also be considered [11].”
  • ChatGPT might hallucinate, i.e., create new data or information which does not exist.

    “ChatGPT might hallucinate i.e., create new data/information which does not exist Deng & Lin (2022).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Deng, J., & Lin, Y.
Affiliations
City University of Macau (MO)
Venue
Frontiers in Computing and Intelligent Systems
Published
2023-01-05
Volume
2
Issue
2
Pages
81-83
ISSN
2832-6024 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4315797044
Cited by
611
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 78 · 2025: 139 · 2024: 237 · 2023: 155 · 2022: 1
FWCI
57.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Frontiers in Computing and Intelligent Systems (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech and dialogue systems
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
Keywords
ChatGPT, large language models, natural language processing, chatbots, OpenAI

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review