Evaluating ChatGPT as a Question Answering System: A Comprehensive Analysis and Comparison with Existing Models
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
In the current era, a multitude of language models has emerged to cater to user inquiries. Notably, the GPT-3.5 Turbo language model has gained substantial attention as the underlying technology for ChatGPT. Leveraging extensive parameters, this model adeptly responds to a wide range of questions. However, due to its reliance on internal knowledge, the accuracy of responses may not be absolute. This article scrutinizes ChatGPT as a Question Answering System (QAS), comparing its performance to other existing QASs. The primary focus is on evaluating ChatGPT's proficiency in extracting responses from provided paragraphs, a core QAS capability. Additionally, performance comparisons are made in scenarios without a surrounding passage. Multiple experiments, exploring response hallucination and considering question complexity, were conducted on ChatGPT. Evaluation employed well-known Question Answering (QA) datasets, including SQuAD, NewsQA, and PersianQuAD, across English and Persian languages. Metrics such as F-score, exact match, and accuracy were employed in the assessment. The study reveals that, while ChatGPT demonstrates competence as a generative model, it is less effective in question answering compared to task-specific models. Providing context improves its performance, and prompt engineering enhances precision, particularly for questions lacking explicit answers in provided paragraphs. ChatGPT excels at simpler factual questions compared to "how" and "why" question types. The evaluation highlights occurrences of hallucinations, where ChatGPT provides responses to questions without available answers in the provided context.
Key facts. Cited by 11 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 14 of its 22 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 Dec 2023.
Builds on
14 of 22 references.
References · 14
- 2016SQuAD: 100,000+ Questions for Machine Comprehension of Textcited by 4,115
- 2019XLNet: Generalized Autoregressive Pretraining for Language Understandingcited by 2,801
- 2019ALBERT: A Lite BERT for Self-supervised Learning of Language Representationscited by 2,772
- 2016MS MARCO: A Human Generated MAchine Reading COmprehension Datasetcited by 1,591
- 2018Know What You Don't Know: Unanswerable Questions for SQuADcited by 1,538
- 2019SpanBERT: Improving Pre-training by Representing and Predicting Spanscited by 832
- 2016NewsQA: A Machine Comprehension Datasetcited by 330
- 2020LUKE: Deep Contextualized Entity Representations with Entity-aware Self-attentioncited by 326
- 2021Retrieving and Reading: A Comprehensive Survey on Open-domain Question Answeringcited by 178
- 2022Improving the Domain Adaptation of Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) Models for Open Domain Question Answeringcited by 126
- 2020Retrospective Reader for Machine Reading Comprehensioncited by 86
- 2023ChatGPT versus Traditional Question Answering for Knowledge Graphs: Current Status and Future Directions Towards Knowledge Graph Chatbotscited by 47
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 6; 2025: 2; 2026: 3.
11 papers.
- 2024MAiDE-up: Multilingual Deception Detection of GPT-generated Hotel Reviewscited by 5
- 2024Exploring the Escalation of Source Bias in User, Data, and Recommender System Feedback Loopcited by 5
- 2026Red Skills or Blue Skills? A Dive Into Skills Published on ClawHubcited by 5
- 2024It Is Not About What You Say, It Is About How You Say It: A Surprisingly Simple Approach for Improving Reading Comprehensioncited by 4
- 2025Structure-Augmented Reasoning Generationcited by 2
- 2025LP-LM: No Hallucinations in Question Answering with Logic Programmingcited by 1
- 2024DaVinci at SemEval-2024 Task 9: Few-shot prompting GPT-3.5 for Unconventional Reasoningcited by 0
- 2024Is Our Chatbot Telling Lies? Assessing Correctness of an LLM-based Dutch Support Chatbotcited by 0
- 2024PersianRAG: A Retrieval-Augmented Generation System for Persian Languagecited by 0
- 2026A Reproducibility Study of Metacognitive Retrieval-Augmented Generationcited by 0
- 2026Assessing Reliability of BERT-Based Models on Question Answering Taskscited by 0
- 2026Assessing Reliability of BERT-Based Models on Question Answering Tasks11 Aug 2026
- 2026A Reproducibility Study of Metacognitive Retrieval-Augmented Generation21 Apr 2026
- 2026Red Skills or Blue Skills? A Dive Into Skills Published on ClawHub19 Mar 2026
- 2025Structure-Augmented Reasoning Generation10 Jun 2025
- 2025LP-LM: No Hallucinations in Question Answering with Logic Programming13 Feb 2025
- 2024PersianRAG: A Retrieval-Augmented Generation System for Persian Language5 Nov 2024
- 2024Is Our Chatbot Telling Lies? Assessing Correctness of an LLM-based Dutch Support Chatbot29 Oct 2024
- 2024It Is Not About What You Say, It Is About How You Say It: A Surprisingly Simple Approach for Improving Reading Comprehension24 Jun 2024
- 2024Exploring the Escalation of Source Bias in User, Data, and Recommender System Feedback Loop28 May 2024
- 2024DaVinci at SemEval-2024 Task 9: Few-shot prompting GPT-3.5 for Unconventional Reasoning19 May 2024
- 2024MAiDE-up: Multilingual Deception Detection of GPT-generated Hotel Reviews19 Apr 2024