Abstract
Massive pre-trained language models have garnered attention and controversy due to their ability to generate human-like responses: attention due to their frequent indistinguishability from human-generated phraseology and narratives, and controversy due to the fact that their convincingly presented arguments and facts are frequently simply false. Just how human-like are these responses when it comes to dialogues about physics, in particular about the standard content of introductory physics courses? This study explores that question by having ChatGTP, the pre-eminent language model in 2023, work through representative assessment content of an actual calculus-based physics course and grading the responses in the same way human responses would be graded. As it turns out, ChatGPT would narrowly pass this course while exhibiting many of the preconceptions and errors of a beginning learner.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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.
