在实用分析中应用人工智能生成对话的可行性研究

IF 1.8 1区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
Xi Chen , Jun Li , Yuting Ye
{"title":"在实用分析中应用人工智能生成对话的可行性研究","authors":"Xi Chen ,&nbsp;Jun Li ,&nbsp;Yuting Ye","doi":"10.1016/j.pragma.2024.01.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This study explores the potential of including AI-generated language in pragmatic analysis– a field that has primarily been conducted on human language use. With the rapid growth of large language models, AI-generated texts and AI-human interactions constitute a growing field where pragmatics research is expanding to. Language data that humans used to hold a full authorship may also involve modifications made by AI. The foremost concern is thus the pragmatic qualities of AI-generated language, such as whether and to which extent AI data mirror the pragmatic patterns we have found in human speech behaviours. In this study, we compare 148 ChatGPT-generated conversations with 82 human-written ones and 354 human evaluations of these conversations. The data are analysed using various methods, including traditional speech strategy coding, four computational methods developed in NLP, and four statistical tests. The findings reveal that ChatGPT performs equally well as human participants in four out of the five tested pragmalinguistic features and five out of six sociopragmatic features. Additionally, the conversations generated by ChatGPT exhibit higher syntactic diversity and a greater sense of formality compared to those written by humans. As a result, our participants are unable to distinguish ChatGPT-generated conversations from human-written ones.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":16899,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pragmatics","volume":"223 ","pages":"Pages 14-30"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A feasibility study for the application of AI-generated conversations in pragmatic analysis\",\"authors\":\"Xi Chen ,&nbsp;Jun Li ,&nbsp;Yuting Ye\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.pragma.2024.01.003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>This study explores the potential of including AI-generated language in pragmatic analysis– a field that has primarily been conducted on human language use. With the rapid growth of large language models, AI-generated texts and AI-human interactions constitute a growing field where pragmatics research is expanding to. Language data that humans used to hold a full authorship may also involve modifications made by AI. The foremost concern is thus the pragmatic qualities of AI-generated language, such as whether and to which extent AI data mirror the pragmatic patterns we have found in human speech behaviours. In this study, we compare 148 ChatGPT-generated conversations with 82 human-written ones and 354 human evaluations of these conversations. The data are analysed using various methods, including traditional speech strategy coding, four computational methods developed in NLP, and four statistical tests. The findings reveal that ChatGPT performs equally well as human participants in four out of the five tested pragmalinguistic features and five out of six sociopragmatic features. Additionally, the conversations generated by ChatGPT exhibit higher syntactic diversity and a greater sense of formality compared to those written by humans. As a result, our participants are unable to distinguish ChatGPT-generated conversations from human-written ones.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16899,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Pragmatics\",\"volume\":\"223 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 14-30\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Pragmatics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378216624000092\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pragmatics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378216624000092","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究探讨了将人工智能生成的语言纳入语用分析的潜力--语用分析主要是针对人类语言使用进行的。随着大型语言模型的快速发展,人工智能生成的文本和人工智能与人类的互动构成了语用学研究不断扩展的领域。人类曾经拥有完全著作权的语言数据也可能涉及人工智能所做的修改。因此,人们最关心的是人工智能生成的语言的语用质量,例如人工智能数据是否以及在多大程度上反映了我们在人类言语行为中发现的语用模式。在本研究中,我们将 148 个 ChatGPT 生成的对话与 82 个人类编写的对话以及 354 个人类对这些对话的评价进行了比较。数据分析采用了多种方法,包括传统的语音策略编码、NLP 中开发的四种计算方法和四种统计测试。研究结果表明,ChatGPT 在五项测试语用特征中的四项和六项社会语用特征中的五项上与人类参与者表现相当。此外,ChatGPT 生成的对话与人类编写的对话相比,句法多样性更高,形式感更强。因此,我们的参与者无法将 ChatGPT 生成的对话与人类编写的对话区分开来。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A feasibility study for the application of AI-generated conversations in pragmatic analysis

This study explores the potential of including AI-generated language in pragmatic analysis– a field that has primarily been conducted on human language use. With the rapid growth of large language models, AI-generated texts and AI-human interactions constitute a growing field where pragmatics research is expanding to. Language data that humans used to hold a full authorship may also involve modifications made by AI. The foremost concern is thus the pragmatic qualities of AI-generated language, such as whether and to which extent AI data mirror the pragmatic patterns we have found in human speech behaviours. In this study, we compare 148 ChatGPT-generated conversations with 82 human-written ones and 354 human evaluations of these conversations. The data are analysed using various methods, including traditional speech strategy coding, four computational methods developed in NLP, and four statistical tests. The findings reveal that ChatGPT performs equally well as human participants in four out of the five tested pragmalinguistic features and five out of six sociopragmatic features. Additionally, the conversations generated by ChatGPT exhibit higher syntactic diversity and a greater sense of formality compared to those written by humans. As a result, our participants are unable to distinguish ChatGPT-generated conversations from human-written ones.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
18.80%
发文量
219
期刊介绍: Since 1977, the Journal of Pragmatics has provided a forum for bringing together a wide range of research in pragmatics, including cognitive pragmatics, corpus pragmatics, experimental pragmatics, historical pragmatics, interpersonal pragmatics, multimodal pragmatics, sociopragmatics, theoretical pragmatics and related fields. Our aim is to publish innovative pragmatic scholarship from all perspectives, which contributes to theories of how speakers produce and interpret language in different contexts drawing on attested data from a wide range of languages/cultures in different parts of the world. The Journal of Pragmatics also encourages work that uses attested language data to explore the relationship between pragmatics and neighbouring research areas such as semantics, discourse analysis, conversation analysis and ethnomethodology, interactional linguistics, sociolinguistics, linguistic anthropology, media studies, psychology, sociology, and the philosophy of language. Alongside full-length articles, discussion notes and book reviews, the journal welcomes proposals for high quality special issues in all areas of pragmatics which make a significant contribution to a topical or developing area at the cutting-edge of research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信