Putting GPT-4o to the Sword: A Comprehensive Evaluation of Language, Vision, Speech, and Multimodal Proficiency
Source abstract
Abstract
As large language models (LLMs) continue to advance, evaluating their comprehensive capabilities becomes significant for their application in various fields. This research study comprehensively evaluates the language, vision, speech, and multimodal capabilities of GPT-4o. The study employs standardized exam questions, reasoning tasks, and translation assessments to assess the model’s language capability. Additionally, GPT-4o’s vision and speech capabilities are tested through image classification and object-recognition tasks, as well as accent classification. The multimodal evaluation assesses the model’s performance in integrating visual and linguistic data. Our findings reveal that GPT-4o demonstrates high accuracy and efficiency across multiple domains in language and reasoning capabilities, excelling in tasks that require few-shot learning. GPT-4o also provides notable improvements in multimodal tasks compared to its predecessors. However, the model shows variability and faces limitations in handling complex and ambiguous inputs, particularly in audio and vision capabilities. This paper highlights the need for more comprehensive benchmarks and robust evaluation frameworks, encompassing qualitative assessments involving human judgment, as well as error analysis. Future work should focus on expanding datasets, investigating prompt-based assessment, and enhancing few-shot learning techniques to test the model’s practical applicability and performance in real-world scenarios.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education · COVID-19 diagnosis using AI
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
School of Computer Science, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON N1G 2W1, Canada
Department of Information Science, University of North Texas, Denton, TX 76201, USA
Department of Computer Science, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011, USA
College of Interdisciplinary Studies, Zayed University, Dubai, United Arab Emirates
Naveen Jindal School of Management, University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, TX 75080, USA
National University of Computer & Emerging Sciences, Islamabad 44000, Pakistan
References (66)
Show source-provided references
1. Gemini Team, Anil, R., Borgeaud, S., Alayrac, J.-B., Yu, J., Soricut, R., Schalkwyk, J., Dai, A.M., Hauth, A., and Millican, K. (2024). Gemini: A Family of Highly Capable Multimodal Models. arXiv.
2. Korinek, A. (2023). Language Models and Cognitive Automation for Economic Research, National Bureau of Economic Research.10.3386/w30957 ↗
3. GPT-3: Its Nature, Scope, Limits, and Consequences10.1007/s11023-020-09548-1 ↗
4. Dillion, D., Mondal, D., Tandon, N., and Gray, K. (2024). Large Language Models as Moral Experts? GPT-4o Outperforms Expert Ethicist in Providing Moral Guidance, OSF.
5. Ray, S. (2024, June 15). Google CEO Says Gemini AI’s ‘Unacceptable’ Responses Offended Users and Showed Bias. Available online: https://www.forbes.com/sites/siladityaray/2024/02/28/google-ceo-says-gemini-ais-unacceptable-responses-offended-users-and-showed-bias/?sh=250e1a1b1103.
6. Ongsulee, P. (2017, January 22–24). Artificial intelligence, machine learning and deep learning. Proceedings of the 2017 15th International Conference on ICT and Knowledge Engineering (ICT&KE), Bangkok, Thailand.10.1109/ICTKE.2017.8259629 ↗
7. Large language models in medicine10.1038/s41591-023-02448-8 ↗
8. Hayawi, K., and Shahriar, S. (2024). AI Agents from Copilots to Coworkers: Historical Context, Challenges, Limitations, Implications, and Practical Guidelines. Preprints.10.20944/preprints202404.0709.v1 ↗
9. Aher, G.V., Arriaga, R.I., and Kalai, A.T. (2023, January 23–29). Using Large Language Models to Simulate Multiple Humans and Replicate Human Subject Studies. Proceedings of the 40th International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, Honolulu, HI, USA. Available online: https://proceedings.mlr.press/v202/aher23a.html.
10. Mannuru, N.R., Shahriar, S., Teel, Z.A., Wang, T., Lund, B.D., Tijani, S., Pohboon, C.O., Agbaji, D., Alhassan, J., and Galley, J. (2023). Artificial intelligence in developing countries: The impact of generative artificial intelligence (AI) technologies for development. Inf. Dev., 02666669231200628.10.1177/02666669231200628 ↗
11. ChatGPT and a new academic reality: Artificial Intelligence-written research papers and the ethics of the large language models in scholarly publishing10.1002/asi.24750 ↗
12. Hu, B., Sheng, Q., Cao, J., Shi, Y., Li, Y., Wang, D., and Qi, P. (2024, January 26–27). Bad actor, good advisor: Exploring the role of large language models in fake news detection. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Vancouver, BC, Canada.10.1609/aaai.v38i20.30214 ↗
13. Koubaa, A. (2023). GPT-4 vs. GPT-3.5: A Concise Showdown. Preprints.10.36227/techrxiv.22312330 ↗
14. Coyne, S., Sakaguchi, K., Galvan-Sosa, D., Zock, M., and Inui, K. (2023). Analyzing the Performance of GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 in Grammatical Error Correction. arXiv.
15. Salman, S., and Liu, X. (2019). Overfitting Mechanism and Avoidance in Deep Neural Networks. arXiv.
16. Shen, X., Wu, Y., Backes, M., and Zhang, Y. (2024). Voice Jailbreak Attacks Against GPT-4o. arXiv.
17. Ying, Z., Liu, A., Liu, X., and Tao, D. (2024). Unveiling the Safety of GPT-4o: An Empirical Study using Jailbreak Attacks. arXiv.
18. Kalyanpur, A., Saravanakumar, K., Barres, V., Chu-Carroll, J., Melville, D., and Ferrucci, D. (2024). LLM-ARC: Enhancing LLMs with an Automated Reasoning Critic. arXiv.
19. Zhang, N., Sun, Z., Xie, Y., Wu, H., and Li, C. (2024). The latest version ChatGPT powered by GPT-4o: What will it bring to the medical field?. Int. J. Surg.10.1097/JS9.0000000000001754 ↗
20. Wang, H., Xu, J., Xie, S., Wang, R., Li, J., Xie, Z., Zhang, B., Xiong, C., and Chen, X. (2024). M4U: Evaluating Multilingual Understanding and Reasoning for Large Multimodal Models. arXiv.
21. Sonoda, Y., Kurokawa, R., Nakamura, Y., Kanzawa, J., Kurokawa, M., Ohizumi, Y., Gonoi, W., and Abe, O. (2024). Diagnostic Performances of GPT-4o, Claude 3 Opus, and Gemini 1.5 Pro in “Diagnosis Please” Cases. medRxiv, 2024.05.26.24307915.10.1101/2024.05.26.24307915 ↗
22. Analyzing an Interest in GPT 4o through Sentiment Analysis using CRISP-DM10.51519/journalisi.v6i2.740 ↗
23. Pang, S., Nol, E., and Heng, K. (2024). ChatGPT-4o for English language teaching and learning: Features, applications, and future prospects. SSRN Sch. Pap., 4837988.10.2139/ssrn.4837988 ↗
24. Xu, S., Wang, Y., Liu, D., and Xu, C. (2024). Collage Prompting: Budget-Friendly Visual Recognition with GPT-4V. arXiv.
25. Evaluating GPT-4V (GPT-4 with Vision) on Detection of Radiologic Findings on Chest Radiographs10.1148/radiol.233270 ↗
26. Allyn, B. (2024, June 15). Scarlett Johansson Says She Is “Shocked, Angered” over New ChatGPT Voice. Available online: https://www.npr.org/2024/05/20/1252495087/openai-pulls-ai-voice-that-was-compared-to-scarlett-johansson-in-the-movie-her.
27. Li, H., Ding, W., Kang, Y., Liu, T., Wu, Z., and Liu, Z. (2021, January 7–11). CTAL: Pre-training cross-modal transformer for audio-and-language representations. Proceedings of the 2021 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Punta Cana, Dominican Republic.10.18653/v1/2021.emnlp-main.323 ↗
28. Federation of State Medical Boards and National Board of Medical Examiners (2024, June 15). USMLE Step 1 Content Description and General Information. Available online: https://www.usmle.org.
29. Kung, T.H., Cheatham, M., Medenilla, A., Sillos, C., Leon, L.D., Elepaño, C., Madriaga, M., Aggabao, R., Diaz-Candido, G., and Maningo, J. (2023). Performance of ChatGPT on USMLE: Potential for AI-assisted medical education using large language models. PLoS Digit. Health, 2.10.1371/journal.pdig.0000198 ↗
30. How Does ChatGPT Perform on the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE)? The Implications of Large Language Models for Medical Education and Knowledge Assessment10.2196/45312 ↗
31. Brin, D., Sorin, V., Vaid, A., Soroush, A., Glicksberg, B.S., Charney, A.W., Nadkarni, G., and Klang, E. (2023). Comparing ChatGPT and GPT-4 performance in USMLE soft skill assessments. Sci. Rep., 13.10.1038/s41598-023-43436-9 ↗
32. Understanding the role of digital technologies in education: A review10.1016/j.susoc.2022.05.004 ↗
33. Callanan, E., Mbakwe, A., Papadimitriou, A., Pei, Y., Sibue, M., Zhu, X., Ma, Z., Liu, X., and Shah, S. (2023). Can GPT models be Financial Analysts? An Evaluation of ChatGPT and GPT-4 on mock CFA Exams. arXiv.
34. College Board (2024, June 15). The SAT Suite of Assessments. Available online: https://www.collegeboard.org.
35. OpenAI, Achiam, J., Adler, S., Agarwal, S., Ahmad, L., Akkaya, I., Aleman, F.L., Almeida, D., Altenschmidt, J., and Altman, S. (2024). GPT-4 Technical Report. arXiv.
36. National Conference of Bar Examiners (2024, June 15). MBE Sample Test Questions. Available online: https://www.ncbex.org.
37. Building a Better Bar Exam10.37419/LR.V7.I1.1 ↗
38. Gpt-4 passes the bar exam10.1098/rsta.2023.0254 ↗
39. Rogers, A., Boyd-Graber, J., and Okazaki, N. (2023, January 9–14). Towards Reasoning in Large Language Models: A Survey. Proceedings of the Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2023, Toronto, ON, Canada.
40. Deductive reasoning10.1002/wcs.20 ↗
41. Inductive reasoning10.1002/wcs.44 ↗
42. Walton, D. (2014). Abductive Reasoning, University of Alabama Press.
43. Moens, M.-F., Huang, X., Specia, L., and Yih, S.W. (2021, January 7–11). Explaining Answers with Entailment Trees. Proceedings of the 2021 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Online and Punta Cana, Dominican Republic.
44. Weston, J., Bordes, A., Chopra, S., Rush, A.M., van Merriënboer, B., Joulin, A., and Mikolov, T. (2015). Towards AI-Complete Question Answering: A Set of Prerequisite Toy Tasks. arXiv.
45. Inui, K., Jiang, J., Ng, V., and Wan, X. (2019, January 3–7). CLUTRR: A Diagnostic Benchmark for Inductive Reasoning from Text. Proceedings of the 2019 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and the 9th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (EMNLP-IJCNLP), Hong Kong, China.
46. Bhagavatula, C., Bras, R.L., Malaviya, C., Sakaguchi, K., Holtzman, A., Rashkin, H., Downey, D., Yih, W., and Choi, Y. (2024, June 15). Abductive Commonsense Reasoning. International Conference on Learning Representations. Available online: https://openreview.net/forum?id=Byg1v1HKDB.
47. GPT-3.5, GPT-4, or BARD? Evaluating LLMs reasoning ability in zero-shot setting and performance boosting through prompts10.1016/j.nlp.2023.100032 ↗
48. Khoshafah, F. (2023). ChatGPT for Arabic-English Translation: Evaluating the Accuracy. Res. Sq.10.21203/rs.3.rs-2814154/v2 ↗
49. Tiedemann, J. (2012, January 23–25). Parallel data, tools and interfaces in OPUS. Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’12), Istanbul, Turkey.
50. Kunchukuttan, A., Mehta, P., and Bhattacharyya, P. (2018, January 7–12). The IIT bombay english-hindi parallel corpus. Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2018), Miyazaki, Japan.
51. Devlin, J., Chang, M.-W., Lee, K., and Toutanova, K. (2019, January 2–7). BERT: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding. Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
52. Inui, K., Jiang, J., Ng, V., and Wan, X. (2019, January 3–7). Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networks. Proceedings of the 2019 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and the 9th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (EMNLP-IJCNLP), Hong Kong, China.
53. Advances in machine vision applications for automatic inspection and quality evaluation of fruits and vegetables10.1007/s11947-010-0411-8 ↗
54. Driver drowsiness detection based on convolutional neural network architecture optimization using genetic algorithm10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3381999 ↗
55. Beyond Sentiment Analysis: A Review of Recent Trends in Text Based Sentiment Analysis and Emotion Detection10.20965/jaciii.2023.p0084 ↗
56. GAN computers generate arts? A survey on visual arts, music, and literary text generation using generative adversarial network10.1016/j.displa.2022.102237 ↗
57. Evaluating OpenAI’s Whisper ASR: Performance analysis across diverse accents and speaker traits10.1121/10.0024876 ↗
58. Ahamad, A., Anand, A., and Bhargava, P. (2020, January 11–16). AccentDB: A database of non-native english accents to assist neural speech recognition. Proceedings of the 12th Language Resources and Evaluation Conference, Marseille, France. Available online: https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/2020.lrec-1.659.
59. Yu, W., Yang, Z., Li, L., Wang, J., Lin, K., Liu, Z., Wang, X., and Wang, L. (2023). MM-Vet: Evaluating Large Multimodal Models for Integrated Capabilities. arXiv.
60. OpenAI’s GPT-4o in surgical oncology: Revolutionary advances in generative artificial intelligence10.1016/j.ejca.2024.114132 ↗
61. Multimodal Fusion Method Based on Self-Attention Mechanism10.1155/2020/8843186 ↗
62. The State of the Art for Cross-Modal Retrieval: A Survey10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3338548 ↗
63. Hayawi, K., Shahriar, S., and Mathew, S.S. (2024). The imitation game: Detecting human and AI-generated texts in the era of ChatGPT and BARD. J. Inf. Sci., 01655515241227531.10.1177/01655515241227531 ↗
64. Shahriar, S., Al Roken, N., and Zualkernan, I. (2023). Classification of Arabic poetry emotions using deep learning. Computers, 12.10.3390/computers12050089 ↗
65. An Empirical Evaluation of Prompting Strategies for Large Language Models in Zero-Shot Clinical Natural Language Processing: Algorithm Development and Validation Study10.2196/55318 ↗
66. How can generative adversarial networks impact computer generated art? Insights from poetry to melody conversion