paper-0123 · paper · 2020
Tom B. Brown et al.
GPT-3; in-context learning and the scaling thesis made undeniable.
Abstract
Recent work has demonstrated substantial gains on many NLP tasks and benchmarks by pre-training on a large corpus of text followed by fine-tuning on a specific task. While typically task-agnostic in architecture, this method still requires task-specific fine-tuning datasets of thousands or tens of thousands of examples. By contrast, humans can generally perform a new language task from only a few examples or from simple instructions - something which current NLP systems still largely struggle to do. Here we show that scaling up language models greatly improves task-agnostic, few-shot performance, sometimes even reaching competitiveness with prior state-of-the-art fine-tuning approaches. Specifically, we train GPT-3, an autoregressive language model with 175 billion parameters, 10x more than any previous non-sparse language model, and test its performance in the few-shot setting. For all tasks, GPT-3 is applied without any gradient updates or fine-tuning, with tasks and few-shot demonstrations specified purely via text interaction with the model. GPT-3 achieves strong performance on many NLP datasets, including translation, question-answering, and cloze tasks, as well as several tasks that require on-the-fly reasoning or domain adaptation, such as unscrambling words, using a novel word in a sentence, or performing 3-digit arithmetic. At the same time, we also identify some datasets where GPT-3's few-shot learning still struggles, as well as some datasets where GPT-3 faces methodological issues related to training on large web corpora. Finally, we find that GPT-3 can generate samples of news articles which human evaluators have difficulty distinguishing from articles written by humans. We discuss broader societal impacts of this finding and of GPT-3 in general. [OpenAlex]
Academic, score -0.1968
| Metric | Status | Value | Norm. | Weight | Contribution | Source | Confidence | License | Provenance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| citation_count | present | 3029.0 | 0.01363 | 0.5 | 0.006815 | OpenAlex | high | OpenAlex, CC0 metadata | link |
| library_holdings | missing | recorded as missing, penalized by rule, never imputed | −0.1 | recorded as missing; penalized by rule, never imputed | |||||
| readership_persistence | present | 7.0 | 0.428571 | 0.05 | 0.021429 | OpenAlex | medium | OpenAlex, CC0 metadata | link |
| syllabus_adoptions | missing | recorded as missing, penalized by rule, never imputed | −0.125 | recorded as missing; penalized by rule, never imputed | |||||
Broad Influence, score -0.0258
| Metric | Status | Value | Norm. | Weight | Contribution | Source | Confidence | License | Provenance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| citation_count | present | 3029.0 | 0.01363 | 0.2 | 0.002726 | OpenAlex | high | OpenAlex, CC0 metadata | link |
| library_holdings | missing | recorded as missing, penalized by rule, never imputed | −0.125 | recorded as missing; penalized by rule, never imputed | |||||
| readership_persistence | present | 7.0 | 0.428571 | 0.4 | 0.171429 | OpenAlex | medium | OpenAlex, CC0 metadata | link |
| syllabus_adoptions | missing | recorded as missing, penalized by rule, never imputed | −0.075 | recorded as missing; penalized by rule, never imputed | |||||
Governance Practitioner, score -0.2787
| Metric | Status | Value | Norm. | Weight | Contribution | Source | Confidence | License | Provenance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| citation_count | present | 3029.0 | 0.01363 | 0.25 | 0.003408 | OpenAlex | high | OpenAlex, CC0 metadata | link |
| library_holdings | missing | recorded as missing, penalized by rule, never imputed | −0.15 | recorded as missing; penalized by rule, never imputed | |||||
| readership_persistence | present | 7.0 | 0.428571 | 0.1 | 0.042857 | OpenAlex | medium | OpenAlex, CC0 metadata | link |
| syllabus_adoptions | missing | recorded as missing, penalized by rule, never imputed | −0.175 | recorded as missing; penalized by rule, never imputed | |||||
A rank is not a verdict on intrinsic worth. It is a transparent output of declared evidence, weights, and missing-data rules at a specific release date.
Disagree with this rank or a number? Challenge it with your evidence. Every challenge gets a public identifier and a published resolution.