mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Analyzing the Performance of GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 in Grammatical Error Correction

arXiv 2303.14342 ↗First posted 25 Mar 2023cs.CLcited by 7

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

GPT-3 and GPT-4 models are powerful, achieving high performance on a variety of Natural Language Processing tasks. However, there is a relative lack of detailed published analysis of their performance on the task of grammatical error correction (GEC). To address this, we perform experiments testing the capabilities of a GPT-3.5 model (text-davinci-003) and a GPT-4 model (gpt-4-0314) on major GEC benchmarks. We compare the performance of different prompts in both zero-shot and few-shot settings, analyzing intriguing or problematic outputs encountered with different prompt formats. We report the performance of our best prompt on the BEA-2019 and JFLEG datasets, finding that the GPT models can perform well in a sentence-level revision setting, with GPT-4 achieving a new high score on the JFLEG benchmark. Through human evaluation experiments, we compare the GPT models' corrections to source, human reference, and baseline GEC system sentences and observe differences in editing strategies and how they are scored by human raters.

Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 29 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 Mar 2023.

Builds on

19 of 29 references.

References · 19

  1. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  2. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
  3. 2019The Curious Case of Neural Text Degenerationcited by 2,881
  4. 2019How Can We Know What Language Models Know?cited by 953
  5. 2020It's Not Just Size That Matters: Small Language Models Are Also Few-Shot Learnerscited by 668
  6. 2020GECToR -- Grammatical Error Correction: Tag, Not Rewritecited by 177
  7. 2017JFLEG: A Fluency Corpus and Benchmark for Grammatical Error Correctioncited by 96
  8. 2022PEER: A Collaborative Language Modelcited by 86
  9. 2023ChatGPT or Grammarly? Evaluating ChatGPT on Grammatical Error Correction Benchmarkcited by 77
  10. 2020Encoder-Decoder Models Can Benefit from Pre-trained Masked Language Models in Grammatical Error Correctioncited by 59
  11. 2018Approaching Neural Grammatical Error Correction as a Low-Resource Machine Translation Taskcited by 56
  12. 2021Synthetic Data Generation for Grammatical Error Correction with Tagged Corruption Modelscited by 56
7 more
  1. 2019An Empirical Study of Incorporating Pseudo Data into Grammatical Error Correctioncited by 55
  2. 2018A Multilayer Convolutional Encoder-Decoder Neural Network for Grammatical Error Correctioncited by 36
  3. 2021LM-Critic: Language Models for Unsupervised Grammatical Error Correctioncited by 33
  4. 2018Efficient Online Scalar Annotation with Bounded Supportcited by 27
  5. 2022Ensembling and Knowledge Distilling of Large Sequence Taggers for Grammatical Error Correctioncited by 12
  6. 2021Neural Quality Estimation with Multiple Hypotheses for Grammatical Error Correctioncited by 11
  7. 2018Near Human-Level Performance in Grammatical Error Correction with Hybrid Machine Translationcited by 6

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2023: 1; 2024: 4; 2025: 1; 2026: 1.

7 papers.