As the echoes of ChatGPT's remarkable success continue to permeate the AI community, its formidable successor, GPT-4, has emerged, showing off a wealth of novel features. In this concise paper, we elucidate the capabilities of GPT-4 and conduct a comparative analysis with its predecessor, ChatGPT, offering insights into their relative strengths and advancements in the rapidly evolving field of generative AI. We also present a comprehensive summary of the major performance results reported by OpenAI on GPT-4 across various Natural Language Processing (NLP) tasks. We place great emphasis on the innovative advancements offered by GPT-4 in comparison to its predecessors. Our focus is on highlighting its remarkable performance while also mentioning its limitations. The purpose of this paper is to deliver a succinct understanding of the new features and performance benchmarks of GPT-4.

Since the release of ChatGPT, numerous studies have highlighted the remarkable performance of ChatGPT, which often rivals or even surpasses human capabilities in various tasks and domains. However, this paper presents a contrasting perspective by demonstrating an instance where human performance excels in typical tasks suited for ChatGPT, specifically in the domain of computer programming. We utilize the IEEExtreme Challenge competition as a benchmark — a prestigious, annual international programming contest encompassing a wide range of problems with different complexities. To conduct a thorough evaluation, we selected and executed a diverse set of 102 challenges, drawn from five distinct IEEExtreme editions, using three major programming languages: Python, Java, and C++. Our empirical analysis provides evidence that contrary to popular belief, human programmers maintain a competitive edge over ChatGPT in certain aspects of problem-solving within the programming context. In fact, we found that the average score obtained by ChatGPT on the set of IEEExtreme programming problems is 3.9 to 5.8 times lower than the average human score, depending on the programming language. This paper elaborates on these findings, offering critical insights into the limitations and potential areas of improvement for AI-based language models like ChatGPT.

The rapid progress in artificial intelligence, machine learning, and natural language processing has led to the emergence of increasingly sophisticated large language models (LLMs) enabling their use in healthcare. The study assesses the performance of two LLMs: the GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 models in passing the medical examination for access to medical specialist training in Spain MIR. Our objectives included gauging the model's overall performance, analyzing discrepancies across different medical specialties, discerning between theoretical and practical questions, estimating error proportions, and assessing the hypothetical severity of errors committed by a physician. We studied the 2022 Spanish MIR examination after excluding those questions requiring image evaluations or having acknowledged errors. The remaining 182 questions were presented to the LLM ChatGPT4 and GPT-3.5 in Spanish and English. Logistic regression models analyzed the relationships between question length and question sequence d performance. GPT-4 outperformed GPT -3.5, scoring 86.81% in Spanish (p<0.001). English translations had a slightly enhanced performance. Among medical specialties, GPT-4 achieved a 100% correct response rate in several areas, with specialties like Pharmacology, ICU, and Infectious Diseases showing lower performance. The error analysis revealed that while a 13.2% error rate existed, gravest categories like "error requiring intervention to sustain life" and "error resulting in death" had a 0% rate. Conclusions: GPT-4 performs robustly on the Spanish MIR examination, varying its capability to discriminate knoweldge across specialties. While the model's high success rate is commendable, understanding the error severity is critical, especially when considering AI's potential role in real-world medical practice and its implication on patient safety.

To understand the mystery of final unification, in our earlier publications, we proposed that there exist three atomic gravitational constants associated with electroweak, strong and electromagnetic interactions. During cosmic evolution, if one is willing to give equal importance to Higgs boson and Planck mass in understanding the massive origin of elementary particles, then it seems quite logical to expect a common relation in between Planck scale and Electroweak scale. Based on these two points, we noticed that, electroweak field seems to be operated by a primordial massive fermion of rest energy 585 GeV. It can be considered as the zygote of all elementary particles and galactic dark matter. H-bar seems to be a characteristic outcome of unified electroweak gravity. Electron rest mass seems to be a characteristic outcome of electroweak and strong gravity. Proton rest mass seems to be a characteristic outcome of electroweak, strong and electromagnetic gravity. Recently observed 3.5 keV photon seems to be an outcome of annihilation of charged baby lepton of rest energy 1.75 keV. Interesting point to be noted is that, Schwarzschild radius of electron is 0.48 nanometer and it needs further investigation with respect to emerging nano-science and technology. Proceeding further, by considering electromagnetic and weak gravitational constants, neutron life time can be understood.

The rapid proliferation of information in the digital era underscores the importance of accurate historical representation and interpretation. While artificial intelligence (AI) has shown promise in various fields, its potential for historical fact-checking and gap-filling remains largely untapped. This study evaluates the performance of three large language models (LLMs)—GPT-3.5, GPT-4, and Google- BARD—in the context of predicting and verifying historical events based on given data. A novel metric, "Distance to Reality" (DTR), is introduced to assess the models' outputs against established historical facts. The results reveal a substantial potential for AI in historical studies, with GPT-4 demonstrating superior performance. This paper underscores the need for further research into AI's role in enriching our understanding of the past and bridging historical knowledge gaps.

This research investigates the potential application of generative language models, especially ChatGPT, in aviation safety analysis as a means to enhance the efficiency of safety analyses and accelerate the time it takes to process incident reports. In particular, ChatGPT was leveraged to generate incident synopses from narratives, which were subsequently compared with ground truth synopses from the Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS) dataset. The comparison was facilitated by using embeddings from Large Language Models (LLMs), with aeroBERT demonstrating the highest similarity due to its aerospace-specific fine-tuning. A positive correlation was observed between synopsis length and their cosine similarity. In a subsequent phase, human factor issues involved in incidents as identified by ChatGPT were compared to human factor issues identified by safety analysts. A concurrence rate of 61% was found, with ChatGPT demonstrating a cautious approach towards attributing human factor issues. Finally, the model was used to attribute incidents to relevant parties. As no dedicated ground truth column existed for this task, a manual evaluation was conducted. ChatGPT attributed the majority of incidents to the Flight Crew, ATC, Ground Personnel, and Maintenance. This study opens new avenues for leveraging AI in aviation safety analysis.

Background: Open AI developed ChatGPT, a language model based on the GPT architecture, designed for text-based communication. Trained on diverse internet texts, ChatGPT generates contextually appropriate responses using machine learning. It understands input through analysis and context interpretation, generating coherent and contextually relevant responses. Interaction is possible through messaging platforms. Materials and Methods: In November 2023, we utilized ChatGPT 3.5, the default version at that time, to answer questions from the Italian National Residency Program Admission Tests (SSMs) of 2021, 2022, and 2023. The questions cover clinical, diagnostic, analytical, therapeutic, and epidemiological scenarios, sometimes accompanied by images. The study compared ChatGPT's answers to the official corrections on the Italian Ministry of University and Research (MUR) website. The scoring method used for evaluation was 1 point for correct answers, 0 points for unanswered questions, and -0.25 points for incorrect answers, reflecting the SSM test scoring system. Results: In summary, ChatGPT was tested with a total of 420 questions, 140 for each test. It achieved an overall accuracy of 80.48%, providing correct answers for 338 questions and incorrect answers for 82 questions. When faced with questions containing both text and images, it answered 55% correctly and 45% incorrectly. The model's performance varied over time, with an 82.14% accuracy rate in 2021 and 2022 (115 correct out of 140) and a 77.14% accuracy rate in 2023 (108 correct out of 140). Applying thisscoring method to the SSM test, ChatGPT would have scored 105 points in 2021 and 2022, and 100 points in 2023. Conclusions: ChatGPT has exhibited above-average performance in the last three SSM tests, highlighting its robust capability to interpret clinical scenarios and offer precise diagnostic and therapeutic guidance. Despite this, some limitations persist, notably the software's inability to interpret non-textual information.