Hãy viết lại bài viết dài kèm hashtag về việc đánh giá sản phẩm và mua ngay tại Queen Mobile bằng tiếng VIệt: Which AI tool is the most accurate

Mua ngay sản phẩm tại Việt Nam:
QUEEN MOBILE chuyên cung cấp điện thoại Iphone, máy tính bảng Ipad, đồng hồ Smartwatch và các phụ kiện APPLE và các giải pháp điện tử và nhà thông minh. Queen Mobile rất hân hạnh được phục vụ quý khách….
_____________________________________________________
Mua #Điện_thoại #iphone #ipad #macbook #samsung #xiaomi #poco #oppo #snapdragon giá tốt, hãy ghé [𝑸𝑼𝑬𝑬𝑵 𝑴𝑶𝑩𝑰𝑳𝑬] ✿ 149 Hòa Bình, phường Hiệp Tân, quận Tân Phú, TP HCM
✿ 402B, Hai Bà Trưng, P Tân Định, Q 1, HCM
✿ 287 đường 3/2 P 10, Q 10, HCM
Hotline (miễn phí) 19003190
Thu cũ đổi mới
Rẻ hơn hoàn tiền
Góp 0%

Thời gian làm việc: 9h – 21h.

KẾT LUẬN

Hãy viết đoạn tóm tắt về nội dung bằng tiếng việt kích thích người mua: Which AI tool is the most accurate

The rise of generative AI models in the Big Tech industry has been swift and undeniable. The surge in interest was catalyzed mainly by OpenAI’s introduction of ChatGPT-3 on November 30, 2022. A generative AI language model that is incredibly good at predicting which words should follow one another when you feed it with prompts.

Not to be left behind, Google had been developing a similar technology known as LaMDA. However, after OpenAI’s ChatGPT took the world by storm, the company was forced to release an early version of its AI model. That’s how we got Bard, Google’s first publicly available chat-based generative model.

Considering the competition, a key question comes up. Can Google Bard keep up with OpenAI? To find out, we compared ChatGPT-3.5, ChatGPT-4, and Bard to see how they performed in different tasks.

The evolution of OpenAI: Rise and promise of GPT-4’s advanced capabilities

Following the success of ChatGPT-3, OpenAI released GPT-3.5, a better-trained conversationalist capable of engaging in topics from science and technology to art and literature. But it was the subsequent GPT-4 that revolutionized the game. Available to subscribers at $20 per month, GPT-4 boasts an impressive processing power with a context window of around 25,000 words, a significant leap from GPT-3.5’s 3,000-word limit. This upgrade in GPT-4 allows for a more accurate understanding of contextual prompts and a better handling of lengthier conversations.

Fictional plot summarization

One area where AI could replace human writers faster than expected is simple summarizations and newswire-based journalism. This kind of writing usually shortens and simplifies longer existing texts, which is something that generative AI has become good at. Finance stories about the stock market and that juggle a ton of numbers are written by AI. We asked ChatGPT-3.5, ChatGPT-4, and Bard to give us 300-word summaries of Frank Herbert’s classic Dune novel.

In this comparison between Bard and ChatGPT, both models deliver promising results. However, GPT-4 takes the lead by a slight edge, providing a well-rounded and comprehensive summary. If you’re unfamiliar with Dune, GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 give clear summaries.

GPT-3.5 offers richer detail, while GPT-4 balances outlining the plot and getting into the deeper themes, giving readers a panoramic view of the story. On the other hand, Bard’s summary presupposes some familiarity with Dune. It overlooks key details like the initial control of the planet Arrakis by the Harkonnens and their eventual reclaiming of it with the emperor’s aid. Moreover, Bard introduces the Fremen leader, Stilgar, but doesn’t explain who he is or what he does.

Purchase recommendations

Many people use Google for purchase recommendations, be it for a new washing machine or a pair of earbuds to wear while working out. Since there’s an overwhelming amount of information online about the latest and greatest products, generative AI models should have an easy time giving recommendations. So, we asked ChatGPT and Bard which new phone you should buy.

In this comparison, the data limitations of GPT-3.5 from 2021 become evident, especially when stacked against GPT-4 and Google Bard, both of which have web browsing capabilities. Google Bard stands out by offering a detailed list of top phones for 2023, including specifications and pricing. Meanwhile, GPT-3.5, due to its constraints, provides generalized buying advice. ChatGPT-4, on the other hand, aligns closer to Google Bard by suggesting specific phone models. However, it fails to provide pricing details and detailed specifications.

ChatGPT and Google Bard stress the importance of individual preferences, budgets, and desired features when making recommendations. In this matchup, Google Bard takes the lead with its comprehensive list of 2023 phone models, as well as specifications and prices.

Excel formulas

Microsoft Excel and Google Sheets are powerful tools that can assist with many tasks, including tracking stock prices, project management using Gantt charts, and analyzing data trends. However, many of us use just a fraction of the available features, particularly when it comes to advanced formulas. That’s where natural language AIs can come in handy, recommending which formulas to use to achieve your goal with a given spreadsheet.

In this face-off, ChatGPT-4 takes the lead. Both GPT-4 and GPT-3.5 efficiently addressed the query. GPT-4 was notably impressive, offering detailed explanations that are user-friendly, even for those unfamiliar with Google Sheets. GPT-3.5, while less detailed, provided essential information complemented by an example. In contrast, Google Bard mentioned its inability to assist with coding. While this is technically accurate, we’re not sure if you can call using spreadsheet formulas coding. Google also didn’t give any suggestions or hints to help point you in the right direction, which is a bummer. Further attempts to get assistance from Bard using different phrasing also proved unsuccessful.

Tourist travel itineraries

Planning a trip can be tedious, and it’s sometimes difficult to find a good place to start. That’s where informative travel plan apps and chatbots come in handy. We pitted ChatGPT and Bard against each other for a two-day weekend trip to New York City.

Based on our analysis of the itineraries, Bard’s suggestions weren’t as balanced compared to ChatGPT. Packing two museum visits into a single day seems overly ambitious. Also, Bard misrepresented the connection between the Statue of Liberty, Liberty Island, and Ellis Island, calling for an unnecessary return to Battery Park. On the plus side, Bard and GPT-4 went beyond creating itineraries, offering additional travel tips. In contrast, ChatGPT-3.5 adhered strictly to the itinerary task.

The ChatGPT versions presented more balanced days, factoring in meal breaks and suggesting ideal neighborhoods for meals. GPT-4 stood out for its richer content, owing to its advanced training and larger model size. It highlighted popular attractions and adopted a holistic travel experience, adding logical activity sequences and unique cultural experiences, like Broadway shows.

We tested the same task using Malmö, Sweden, as our next city. Google Bard’s performance was less than stellar. It inaccurately assumed an airplane arrival and tacked on travel time. Upon request for adjustments, Bard moved the itinerary’s start to day two and changed the mode of arrival to train. Meanwhile, GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 adapted smoothly to similar feedback, replacing the absent journey parts seamlessly. Given this adaptability, ChatGPT-4 is the superior choice in this comparison.

Bonus: How to find and join a US PhD program

To put Bard and ChatGPT to work with a more complicated question, we asked them to guide us through the process of enrolling in a Ph.D. program in the US, with the added twist that we didn’t study in the US, but that we obtained our master’s degree in the EU.

Both Bard and ChatGPT-3.5 recognized that we graduated with a degree in the EU, yet neither looked into potential challenges, such as language certificates or visa requirements for non-US citizens. In contrast, GPT-4 explored deeper, addressing the application logistics and post-admission aspects like the visa process and tips for cultural acclimatization.

When examining ChatGPT’s responses, GPT-3.5 highlighted the role of advisors in the Ph.D. process, recommending a research-focused approach to applications. GPT-4, on the other hand, provided a comprehensive view of the admission process, presenting a logical step-by-step guide. Bard’s strategy seems counterintuitive. It advises applying for Ph.D. programs first and then networking and seeking potential mentors. Ideally, this order should be reversed.

The directness of Bard contrasts with the structured guidance of GPT-4 and the advisor-centric approach of GPT-3.5. Following Bard’s recommendations might result in more challenges for most applicants. GPT-4 stands out again for its structured approach, making it the top choice.

Generative AI has a lot of potential

Through our tests, ChatGPT-4 stands out as the superior model, making the $20 per month investment worthwhile. Even with only data until 2021, GPT-3.5 beats Bard, proving that OpenAI plays in a different league than Google in this domain. The responses from GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 often provide greater context, and they excel in addressing follow-up queries. They also boast enhanced functionalities, such as crafting spreadsheet formulas. Nevertheless, neither solution is 100% accurate. For the time being, fact-check everything that they do.

Looking ahead, there’s no doubt the landscape will change for the better. ChatGPT and Bard are rapidly progressing, and it’s foreseeable that they’ll become indispensable tools in different professions, along with simplifying numerous everyday tasks we might soon take for granted.

Xem chi tiết và đăng ký