Project Management

Comparing ChatGPT to Two Other LLMs

From the AI IQ Blog
by
Technology offers an incredible opportunity to improve project performance. This blog shares the latest research and how organizations are implementing AI into their project methodology. Come with an open mind, increase your knowledge, share your concerns, and become a project manager with new skills to offer an organization.

About this Blog

RSS

Recent Posts

Using AI to Improve Team Communication (Without Losing Trust)

Start with AI, not a Project Framework.

Will the PMO Become the Center of AI Adoption in Organizations?

Project Manager Accountability in the Era of AI

Reference Class Forecasting Depends on How You Define “Similar”

Categories

AI, Artificial Intelligence, Ethics, Machine learning, Natural language processing, procurement, Scope Management

Date

linkedin twitter facebook Request to reuse this  


In a previous blog titled, An Empirical Study Comparing ChatGPT to Project Managers, I described a scope document study comparing the results of ChatGPT to the ability of project management students. In my research, ChatGPT was faster at identifying errors and more accurate, but it was only about 80 percent accurate. The study also revealed that some errors in the document were not listed by the large language model (LLM).

One of my student groups at the business college in France performed a variation on my work and included it in their major assignment. They compared three LLMs by requesting them to identify errors in a scope document.

 

Observations

The first observation is that LLMs perform at different speeds, although all are very fast compared to humans. The next observation is that each LLM had a different result. The explanation for different results should be obvious. Since the input document was identical for each LLM, the different results are based on what data each LLM could access. The quality and quantity of data used to train machine learning models are significant factors in producing accurate and reliable results. Acquiring high-quality data is becoming a priority for organizations that train machine learning models.     

I want to thank the students for allowing me to use their assignment content for my blog: Dalton Bent, Carlos Carlson, Allen Jomy, and Vishal Venkata Penjarla.

Their study is one more example of the significance of data for AI technology to be successful.

 


Posted on: August 26, 2024 12:00 AM | Permalink

Comments (3)

Please login or join to subscribe to this item
avatar
Matthew Morey Project Turn Around and Recovery Expert| C4 Explosive Leadership Training LLC Old Hickory, Tn, United States
Was a comparison of the errors identifed by the LLMs performed? Did each find the same errors (just somewhat more or less) or did each LLM find different errors? If you loaded the file again to the LLM in a separate chat, did it identify the same errors?

One of the more interesting dynamics of LLMs is that you can get different results with the exact same information shared in different chats.

avatar
Paul Boudreau President| Stonemeadow Consulting Kanata, Ontario, Canada
@Matthew. Thanks for the comment. They all found the same errors based on ChatGPT finding more. The LLMs are fairly consistent for this simple type of exercise. I have another blog coming up that discusses LLMs in more detail.

avatar
Yuting Wu Winnipeg, MANITOBA, Canada
looking forward to see the other blog!

Please Login/Register to leave a comment.

ADVERTISEMENTS

"Only those who have been in the frying pan are really qualified to talk about the heat."

- Winston Churchill

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsors