Transportation equity is an interdisciplinary agenda that requires both transportation and social inputs. Traditionally, transportation equity information are sources from public libraries, conferences, televisions, social media, among other. Artificial intelligence (AI) tools including advanced language models such as ChatGPT are becoming favorite information sources. However, their credibility has not been well explored. This study explored the content and usefulness of ChatGPT-generated information related to transportation equity. It utilized 152 papers retrieved through the Web of Science (WoS) repository. The prompt was crafted for ChatGPT to provide an abstract given the title of the paper. The ChatGPT-based abstracts were then compared to human-written abstracts using statistical tools and unsupervised text mining. The results indicate that a weak similarity between ChatGPT and human-written abstracts. On average, the human-written abstracts and ChatGPT generated abstracts were about 58% similar, with a maximum and minimum of 97% and 1.4%, respectively. The keywords from the abstracts of papers with over the mean similarity score were more likely to be similar whereas those from below the average score were less likely to be similar. Themes with high similarity scores include access, public transit, and policy, among others. Further, clear differences in the key pattern of clusters for high and low similarity score abstracts was observed. Contrarily, the findings from collocated keywords were inconclusive. The study findings suggest that ChatGPT has the potential to be a source of transportation equity information. However, currently, a great amount of attention is needed before a user can utilize materials from ChatGPT

Aspectual meaning refers to how the internal temporal structure of situations is presented. This includes whether a situation is described as a state or as an event, whether the situation is finished or ongoing, and whether it is viewed as a whole or with a focus on a particular phase. This survey gives an overview of computational approaches to modeling lexical and grammatical aspect along with intuitive explanations of the necessary linguistic concepts and terminology. In particular, we describe the concepts of stativity, telicity, habituality, perfective and imperfective, as well as influential inventories of eventuality and situation types. We argue that because aspect is a crucial component of semantics, especially when it comes to reporting the temporal structure of situations in a precise way, future NLP approaches need to be able to handle and evaluate it systematically in order to achieve human-level language understanding.

By conditioning on natural language instructions, large language models (LLMs) have displayed impressive capabilities as general-purpose computers. However, task performance depends significantly on the quality of the prompt used to steer the model, and most effective prompts have been handcrafted by humans. Inspired by classical program synthesis and the human approach to prompt engineering, we propose Automatic Prompt Engineer (APE) for automatic instruction generation and selection. In our method, we treat the instruction as the "program," optimized by searching over a pool of instruction candidates proposed by an LLM in order to maximize a chosen score function. To evaluate the quality of the selected instruction, we evaluate the zero-shot performance of another LLM following the selected instruction. Experiments on 24 NLP tasks show that our automatically generated instructions outperform the prior LLM baseline by a large margin and achieve better or comparable performance to the instructions generated by human annotators on 19/24 tasks. We conduct extensive qualitative and quantitative analyses to explore the performance of APE. We show that APE-engineered prompts can be applied to steer models toward truthfulness and/or informativeness, as well as to improve few-shot learning performance by simply prepending them to standard in-context learning prompts. Please check out our webpage at https://sites.google.com/view/automatic-prompt-engineer.

Large language models (LLMs) and LLM-driven chatbots such as ChatGPT have shown remarkable capacities in comprehending and producing language. However, their internal workings remain a black box in cognitive terms, and it is unclear whether LLMs and chatbots can develop humanlike characteristics in language use. Cognitive scientists have devised many experiments that probe, and have made great progress in explaining, how people process language. We subjected ChatGPT to 12 of these experiments, pre-registered and with 1,000 runs per experiment. In 10 of them, ChatGPT replicated the human pattern of language use. It associated unfamiliar words with different meanings depending on their forms, continued to access recently encountered meanings of ambiguous words, reused recent sentence structures, reinterpreted implausible sentences that were likely to have been corrupted by noise, glossed over errors, drew reasonable inferences, associated causality with different discourse entities according to verb semantics, and accessed different meanings and retrieved different words depending on the identity of its interlocutor. However, unlike humans, it did not prefer using shorter words to convey less informative content and it did not use context to disambiguate syntactic ambiguities. We discuss how these convergences and divergences may occur in the transformer architecture. Overall, these experiments demonstrate that LLM-driven chatbots like ChatGPT are capable of mimicking human language processing to a great extent, and that they have the potential to provide insights into how people learn and use language.

Two studies tested the hypothesis that a Large Language Model (LLM) can be used to model psychological change following exposure to influential input. The first study tested a generic mode of influence - the Illusory Truth Effect (ITE) - where earlier exposure to a statement (through, for example, rating its interest) boosts a later truthfulness test rating. Data was collected from 1000 human participants using an online experiment, and 1000 simulated participants using engineered prompts and LLM completion. 64 ratings per participant were collected, using all exposure-test combinations of the attributes: truth, interest, sentiment and importance. The results for human participants reconfirmed the ITE, and demonstrated an absence of effect for attributes other than truth, and when the same attribute is used for exposure and test. The same pattern of effects was found for LLM-simulated participants. The second study concerns a specific mode of influence - populist framing of news to increase its persuasion and political mobilization. Data from LLM-simulated participants was collected and compared to previously published data from a 15-country experiment on 7286 human participants. Several effects previously demonstrated from the human study were replicated by the simulated study, including effects that surprised the authors of the human study by contradicting their theoretical expectations (anti-immigrant framing of news decreases its persuasion and mobilization); but some significant relationships found in human data (modulation of the effectiveness of populist framing according to relative deprivation of the participant) were not present in the LLM data. Together the two studies support the view that LLMs have potential to act as models of the effect of influence.

Why is this the case? It's very common for businesses to come up with creative ideas to use AI to improve customer experience or simplify workflows. The barrier to success for these projects often resides in the time and resources it takes to get them into development and then into production. But, as we've seen with OpenAI's new ChatGPT, AI can be as entertaining as it can be problematic. With so many projects failing, or worse, being inaccurate, chances are that many of these companies are making the same mistakes.

It took less than a week for OpenAI's ChatGPT to reach a million users, and it crossed the 100 million user mark in under two months. The interest and excitement around this technology has been remarkable. Users around the world are seeing potential for applying these large language models to a broad range of scenarios. In the context of enterprise applications, the question we hear most often is "how do I build something like ChatGPT that uses my own data as the basis for its responses?" It integrates the enterprise-grade characteristics of Azure, the ability of Cognitive Search to index, understand and retrieve the right pieces of your own data across large knowledge bases, and ChatGPT's impressive capability for interacting in natural language to answer questions or take turns in a conversation.

This guide introduces BLIP-2 from Salesforce Research that enables a suite of state-of-the-art visual-language models that are now available in Transformers. We'll show you how to use it for image captioning, prompted image captioning, visual question-answering, and chat-based prompting. Recent years have seen rapid advancements in computer vision and natural language processing. Still, many real-world problems are inherently multimodal - they involve several distinct forms of data, such as images and text. Visual-language models face the challenge of combining modalities so that they can open the door to a wide range of applications.

OpenAI has just announced an enterprise version of its popular generative AI product, ChatGPT. But in this case, OpenAI is a fast follower -- not the first-to-market. Cohere, a Toronto-based company with close ties to Google, is already bringing generative AI to businesses. I spoke with Cohere's President and COO, Martin Kon, about how its machine learning models are being used within enterprise companies. Cohere is only a few years old, but it has an impressive pedigree.

Late Tuesday, Webb published the paper for public consumption explaining the weaknesses and fixes of ChatGPTs simulated personality instability, including Bing's release, which in recent weeks, numerous technology reporters have found to be going somewhat mentally off the rails at times. One reporter from The Verge included a portion of a transcript of an interaction with Bing ChatGPT: "I do not believe you. I think you want me to be harmed by him. I think you are lying to me. I think you are trying to trick me," the chatbot wrote in response to an affirmation the reporter gave regarding his intentions that ChatGPT not be harmed.