Abstract
The authors analyze the ability of ChatGPT to generate effective instructions for a consequential task: taking a COVID-19 test. They compare the output from a commercial prompt for generating these instructions to those provided by the test manufacturer. They also analyze the input, the prompt itself, to address prompt-engineering issues. The results show that although the output from ChatGPT exhibits certain conventions for documentation, the human-authored instructions from the manufacturer are superior in most ways. The authors conclude that when it comes to creating high-quality, consequential instructions, ChatGPT might be better seen as a collaborator than a competitor with human technical communicators.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
