GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 are the two most widely used large language model (LLM) services. However, when and how these models are updated over time is opaque. Here, we evaluate the March 2023 and June 2023 versions of GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 on several diverse tasks: 1) math problems, 2) sensitive/dangerous questions, 3) opinion surveys, 4) multi-hop knowledge-intensive questions, 5) generating code, 6) US Medical License tests, and 7) visual reasoning. We find that the performance and behavior of both GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 can vary greatly over time. For example, GPT-4 (March 2023) was reasonable at identifying prime vs. composite numbers (84% accuracy) but GPT-4 (June 2023) was poor on these same questions (51% accuracy). This is partly explained by a drop in GPT-4's amenity to follow chain-of-thought prompting. Interestingly, GPT-3.5 was much better in June than in March in this task. GPT-4 became less willing to answer sensitive questions and opinion survey questions in June than in March. GPT-4 performed better at multi-hop questions in June than in March, while GPT-3.5's performance dropped on this task. Both GPT-4 and GPT-3.5 had more formatting mistakes in code generation in June than in March. We provide evidence that GPT-4's ability to follow user instructions has decreased over time, which is one common factor behind the many behavior drifts. Overall, our findings show that the behavior of the "same" LLM service can change substantially in a relatively short amount of time, highlighting the need for continuous monitoring of LLMs.

Large language models possess remarkable capacity for processing language, but it remains unclear whether these models can further generate creative content. The present study aims to investigate the creative thinking of large language models through a cognitive perspective. We utilize the divergent association task (DAT), an objective measurement of creativity that asks models to generate unrelated words and calculates the semantic distance between them. We compare the results across different models and decoding strategies. Our findings indicate that: (1) When using the greedy search strategy, GPT-4 outperforms 96% of humans, while GPT-3.5-turbo exceeds the average human level. (2) Stochastic sampling and temperature scaling are effective to obtain higher DAT scores for models except GPT-4, but face a trade-off between creativity and stability. These results imply that advanced large language models have divergent semantic associations, which is a fundamental process underlying creativity.

Large language models (LLMs) such as GPT-4, PaLM, and Llama have significantly propelled the generation of AI-crafted text. With rising concerns about their potential misuse, there is a pressing need for AI-generated-text forensics. Neural authorship attribution is a forensic effort, seeking to trace AI-generated text back to its originating LLM. The LLM landscape can be divided into two primary categories: proprietary and open-source. In this work, we delve into these emerging categories of LLMs, focusing on the nuances of neural authorship attribution. To enrich our understanding, we carry out an empirical analysis of LLM writing signatures, highlighting the contrasts between proprietary and open-source models, and scrutinizing variations within each group. By integrating stylometric features across lexical, syntactic, and structural aspects of language, we explore their potential to yield interpretable results and augment pre-trained language model-based classifiers utilized in neural authorship attribution. Our findings, based on a range of state-of-the-art LLMs, provide empirical insights into neural authorship attribution, paving the way for future investigations aimed at mitigating the threats posed by AI-generated misinformation.

Recursion is one of the hallmarks of human language. While many design features of language have been shown to exist in animal communication systems, recursion has not. Previous research shows that GPT-4 is the first large language model (LLM) to exhibit metalinguistic abilities (Begu\v{s}, D\k{a}bkowski, and Rhodes 2023). Here, we propose several prompt designs aimed at eliciting and analyzing recursive behavior in LLMs, both linguistic and non-linguistic. We demonstrate that when explicitly prompted, GPT-4 can both produce and analyze recursive structures. Thus, we present one of the first studies investigating whether meta-linguistic awareness of recursion -- a uniquely human cognitive property -- can emerge in transformers with a high number of parameters such as GPT-4.

Despite their impressive capabilities, both GPT-4 and GPT-3.5 have limitations. These models can occasionally generate incorrect or nonsensical information, especially when dealing with ambiguous or complex queries. Additionally, both models may produce text that is overly verbose, repeating the same information in different ways. It's important to keep these limitations in mind when using these models for critical applications.