REVIEW 7 cited by
People cannot distinguish GPT-4 from a human in a Turing test
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
We evaluated 3 systems (ELIZA, GPT-3.5 and GPT-4) in a randomized, controlled, and preregistered Turing test. Human participants had a 5 minute conversation with either a human or an AI, and judged whether or not they thought their interlocutor was human. GPT-4 was judged to be a human 54% of the time, outperforming ELIZA (22%) but lagging behind actual humans (67%). The results provide the first robust empirical demonstration that any artificial system passes an interactive 2-player Turing test. The results have implications for debates around machine intelligence and, more urgently, suggest that deception by current AI systems may go undetected. Analysis of participants' strategies and reasoning suggests that stylistic and socio-emotional factors play a larger role in passing the Turing test than traditional notions of intelligence.
Forward citations
Cited by 7 Pith papers
-
Multilingual Performance of a Multimodal Artificial Intelligence System on Multisubject Physics Concept Inventories
GPT-4o averaged 71% on English physics concept inventories, outperformed average post-instruction undergraduates in most subjects but not laboratory skills, and scored far worse on image-dependent items and in non-Wes...
-
Assessing Consciousness-Related Behaviors in Large Language Models Using the Maze Test
A new maze-navigation benchmark for LLMs reports that reasoning models outperform standard ones, but the link from performance gaps to a lack of persistent self-awareness is an overreach.
-
AI or Human? Understanding Perceptions of Embodied Robots with LLMs
In an embodied Turing Test with a physical robot, 34 participants could not identify AI versus human control above chance, and human operators were misidentified as AI far more often than the reverse.
-
Probing for Consciousness in Machines
Probe classifiers can decode an RL agent's position from its LSTM activations in MiniHack, but this supports spatial information encoding, not a world model or self model.
-
Exploring Consciousness in LLMs: A Systematic Survey of Theories, Implementations, and Frontier Risks
This survey organizes research on LLM consciousness, separating consciousness from awareness and cataloging theoretical tools, empirical proxies, risks, and open challenges.
-
Lies, Damned Lies, and Distributional Language Statistics: Persuasion and Deception with Large Language Models
Current LLMs are about as persuasive as humans, can deceive strategically, but show small effect sizes; future techniques may increase this risk.
-
A Survey on Multi-Turn Interaction Capabilities of Large Language Models
A comprehensive review of how large language models are evaluated, trained, and improved for multi-turn interaction, organized into evaluation practices, core capabilities, and general algorithms.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.