Fetching the paper…
Reading the bibliography…
Instruction-tuned large language models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT, have led to promising zero-shot performance in discriminative natural language understanding (NLU) tasks.
Language models are few-shot learners
Tom Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, Melanie Subbiah, Jared D Kaplan, Prafulla Dhariwal, Arvind Neelakantan, Pranav Shyam, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, et al. 2020 · 1901
Earlier work this paper cites.
Forming impressions of personality
Solomon E Asch. 1946 · 1946
Earlier work this paper cites.
Primacy versus recency in retention of information and opinion change
William D Crano. 1977 · 1977
Earlier work this paper cites.
A recency-based account of the primacy effect in free recall
Lydia Tan and Geoff Ward. 2000 · 2000
Earlier work this paper cites.
Efficient intent detection with dual sentence encoders
Iñigo Casanueva, Tadas Temčinas, Daniela Gerz, Matthew Henderson, and Ivan Vulić. 2020b · 2003
Earlier work this paper cites.
Jensen-shannon divergence and hilbert space embedding
Bent Fuglede and Flemming Topsoe. 2004 · 2004
Earlier work this paper cites.
Goemotions: A dataset of fine-grained emotions
Dorottya Demszky, Dana Movshovitz-Attias, Jeongwoo Ko, Alan Cowen, Gaurav Nemade, and Sujith Ravi. 2020 · 2005
Earlier work this paper cites.
Primacy effect or recency effect? a long-term memory test of super bowl commercials
Cong Li. 2010 · 2010
Earlier work this paper cites.
Effective 20 newsgroups dataset cleaning
Khaled Albishre, Mubarak Albathan, and Yuefeng Li. 2015 · 2015
Earlier work this paper cites.
Attention is all you need
Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N Gomez, Łukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. 2017 · 2017
Earlier work this paper cites.
Position-aware attention and supervised data improve slot filling
Yuhao Zhang, Victor Zhong, Danqi Chen, Gabor Angeli, and Christopher D Manning. 2017 · 2017
Earlier work this paper cites.
A transparent framework for evaluating unintended demographic bias in word embeddings
Chris Sweeney and Maryam Najafian. 2019 · 2019
Earlier work this paper cites.
TACRED revisited: A thorough evaluation of the TACRED relation extraction task
Christoph Alt, Aleksandra Gabryszak, and Leonhard Hennig. 2020 · 2020
Earlier work this paper cites.
Efficient intent detection with dual sentence encoders
Iñigo Casanueva, Tadas Temcinas, Daniela Gerz, Matthew Henderson, and Ivan Vulic. 2020a · 2020
Earlier work this paper cites.
Learning from multiple experts: Self-paced knowledge distillation for long-tailed classification
Liuyu Xiang, Guiguang Ding, and Jungong Han. 2020 · 2020
Earlier work this paper cites.
Fantastically ordered prompts and where to find them: Overcoming few-shot prompt order sensitivity
Yao Lu, Max Bartolo, Alastair Moore, Sebastian Riedel, and Pontus Stenetorp. 2021 · 2021
Earlier work this paper cites.
Counterfactual inference for text classification debiasing
Chen Qian, Fuli Feng, Lijie Wen, Chunping Ma, and Pengjun Xie. 2021 · 2021
Cited alongside, same era.
Scaling language models: Methods, analysis & insights from training gopher
Jack W Rae, Sebastian Borgeaud, Trevor Cai, Katie Millican, Jordan Hoffmann, Francis Song, John Aslanides, Sarah Henderson, Roman Ring, Susannah Young, et al. 2021 · 2021
Cited alongside, same era.
Re-tacred: Addressing shortcomings of the tacred dataset
George Stoica, Emmanouil Antonios Platanios, and Barnabás Póczos. 2021 · 2021
Cited alongside, same era.
Calibrate before use: Improving few-shot performance of language models
Zihao Zhao, Eric Wallace, Shi Feng, Dan Klein, and Sameer Singh. 2021 · 2021
Cited alongside, same era.
Palm: Scaling language modeling with pathways
Aakanksha Chowdhery, Sharan Narang, Jacob Devlin, Maarten Bosma, Gaurav Mishra, Adam Roberts, Paul Barham, Hyung Won Chung, Charles Sutton, Sebastian Gehrmann, et al. 2022 · 2022
Bias and debias in recommender system: A survey and future directions
Jiawei Chen, Hande Dong, Xiang Wang, Fuli Feng, Meng Wang, and Xiangnan He. 2023 · 2023
Closest in time.
Vicuna: An open-source chatbot impressing gpt-4 with 90%* chatgpt quality
Wei-Lin Chiang, Zhuohan Li, Zi Lin, Ying Sheng, Zhanghao Wu, Hao Zhang, Lianmin Zheng, Siyuan Zhuang, Yonghao Zhuang, Joseph E. Gonzalez, Ion Stoica, and Eric P. Xing. 2023 · 2023
Closest in time.
Mitigating label biases for in-context learning
Yu Fei, Yifan Hou, Zeming Chen, and Antoine Bosselut. 2023 · 2023
Closest in time.
Is chatgpt a good causal reasoner? a comprehensive evaluation
Jinglong Gao, Xiao Ding, Bing Qin, and Ting Liu. 2023 · 2023
Closest in time.
alphaXiv searches the wider corpus for related work and actual follow-ups.
alphaXiv is searching for related work…
Cited alongside, same era.
A survey for in-context learning
Qingxiu Dong, Lei Li, Damai Dai, Ce Zheng, Zhiyong Wu, Baobao Chang, Xu Sun, Jingjing Xu, and Zhifang Sui. 2022 · 2022
Cited alongside, same era.
Jack FitzGerald, Christopher Hench, Charith Peris, Scott Mackie, Kay Rottmann, Ana Sanchez, Aaron Nash, Liam Urbach, Vishesh Kakarala, Richa Singh, et al. 2022 · 2022
Cited alongside, same era.
Mubin Ul Haque, Isuru Dharmadasa, Zarrin Tasnim Sworna, Roshan Namal Rajapakse, and Hussain Ahmad. 2022 · 2022
Cited alongside, same era.
Introducing chatgpt https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt)
OpenAI. 2022 · 2022
Cited alongside, same era.
Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback
Long Ouyang, Jeffrey Wu, Xu Jiang, Diogo Almeida, Carroll Wainwright, Pamela Mishkin, Chong Zhang, Sandhini Agarwal, Katarina Slama, Alex Ray, et al. 2022 · 2022
Cited alongside, same era.
Shaden Smith, Mostofa Patwary, Brandon Norick, Patrick LeGresley, Samyam Rajbhandari, Jared Casper, Zhun Liu, Shrimai Prabhumoye, George Zerveas, Vijay Korthikanti, et al. 2022 · 2022
Cited alongside, same era.
Lamda: Language models for dialog applications
Romal Thoppilan, Daniel De Freitas, Jamie Hall, Noam Shazeer, Apoorv Kulshreshtha, Heng-Tze Cheng, Alicia Jin, Taylor Bos, Leslie Baker, Yu Du, et al. 2022 · 2022
Cited alongside, same era.
Ridong Han, Tao Peng, Chaohao Yang, Benyou Wang, Lu Liu, and Xiang Wan. 2023 · 2023
Closest in time.
The moral authority of chatgpt
Sebastian Krügel, Andreas Ostermaier, and Matthias Uhl. 2023 · 2023
Closest in time.
Bo Li, Gexiang Fang, Yang Yang, Quansen Wang, Wei Ye, Wen Zhao, and Shikun Zhang. 2023 · 2023
Closest in time.
Yubo Ma, Yixin Cao, YongChing Hong, and Aixin Sun. 2023 · 2023
Closest in time.
On the educational impact of chatgpt: Is artificial intelligence ready to obtain a university degree?
Kamil Malinka, Martin Peresíni, Anton Firc, Ondrej Hujnak, and Filip Janus. 2023 · 2023
Closest in time.
Applying bert and chatgpt for sentiment analysis of lyme disease in scientific literature
Teo Susnjak. 2023 · 2023
Closest in time.
Gpt-re: In-context learning for relation extraction using large language models
Zhen Wan, Fei Cheng, Zhuoyuan Mao, Qianying Liu, Haiyue Song, Jiwei Li, and Sadao Kurohashi. 2023 · 2023
Closest in time.
A causal view of entity bias in (large) language models
Fei Wang, Wenjie Mo, Yiwei Wang, Wenxuan Zhou, and Muhao Chen. 2023 · 2023
Closest in time.
Zero-shot information extraction via chatting with chatgpt
Xiang Wei, Xingyu Cui, Ning Cheng, Xiaobin Wang, Xin Zhang, Shen Huang, Pengjun Xie, Jinan Xu, Yufeng Chen, Meishan Zhang, et al. 2023 · 2023
Closest in time.
Zero-shot temporal relation extraction with chatgpt
Chenhan Yuan, Qianqian Xie, and Sophia Ananiadou. 2023 · 2023
Closest in time.
Can chatgpt understand too? a comparative study on chatgpt and fine-tuned bert
Qihuang Zhong, Liang Ding, Juhua Liu, Bo Du, and Dacheng Tao. 2023 · 2023
Closest in time.