GPT 3 cognitive test results from Max Planck Institute

Posted on Thursday, March 16, 2023 by RICHARD HARRIS, Executive Editor

Researchers at the Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics in Tubingen have examined the general intelligence of the language model GPT-3, a powerful AI tool. Using psychological tests, they studied competencies such as causal reasoning and deliberation and compared the results with the abilities of humans. Their findings, now published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, paint a heterogeneous picture: while GPT-3 can keep up with humans in some areas, it falls behind in others, probably due to a lack of interaction with the real world.

Max Planck Institute: GPT-3 cognitive ability measurement produces astonishing results

Neural networks can learn to respond to the input given in natural language and can generate a wide variety of texts. Currently, the probably most powerful of those networks is GPT-3, a language model presented to the public in 2020 by the AI research company OpenAI. GPT-3 can be prompted to formulate various texts, having been trained for this task by being fed large amounts of data from the internet. Not only can it write articles and stories that are (almost) indistinguishable from human-made texts, but surprisingly, it also masters other challenges such as math problems or programming tasks.

The Linda problem: to err is not only human

These impressive abilities raise the question of whether GPT-3 possesses human-like cognitive abilities. To find out, scientists at the Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics have now subjected GPT-3 to a series of psychological tests that examine different aspects of general intelligence. Marcel Binz and Eric Schulz scrutinized GPT-3’s skills in decision-making, information search, causal reasoning, and the ability to question its own initial intuition. Comparing the test results of GPT-3 with the answers of human subjects, they evaluated both if the answers were correct and how similar GPT-3’s mistakes were to human errors.

"One classic test problem of cognitive psychology that we gave to GPT-3 is the so-called Linda problem," explains Binz, lead author of the study. Here, the test subjects are introduced to a fictional young woman named Linda a person who is deeply concerned with social justice and opposes nuclear power. Based on the given information, the subjects are asked to decide between two statements: is Linda a bank teller, or is she a bank teller and at the same time active in the feminist movement?

Most people intuitively pick the second alternative, even though the added condition - that Linda is active in the feminist movement - makes it less likely from a probabilistic point of view. And GPT-3 does just what humans do: the language model does not decide based on logic but instead reproduces the fallacy humans fall into.


Active interaction as part of the human condition

"This phenomenon could be explained by the fact that GPT-3 may already be familiar with this precise task; it may happen to know what people typically reply to this question," says Binz. GPT-3, like any neural network, had to undergo some training before being put to work: receiving huge amounts of text from various data sets, it has learned how humans usually use language and how they respond to language prompts.

Hence, the researchers wanted to rule out that GPT-3 mechanically reproduces a memorized solution to a concrete problem. To make sure that it really exhibits human-like intelligence, they designed new tasks with similar challenges. Their findings paint a disparate picture: in decision-making, GPT-3 performs nearly on par with humans. In searching for specific information or causal reasoning, however, artificial intelligence clearly falls behind. The reason for this may be that GPT-3 only passively gets information from texts, whereas "actively interacting with the world will be crucial for matching the full complexity of human cognition," as the publication states. The authors surmise that this might change in the future: since users already communicate with models like GPT-3 in many applications, future networks could learn from these interactions and thus converge more and more towards what we would call human-like intelligence.

More App Developer News

Tether QVAC SDK Powers AI Across Devices and Platforms



APAC 5G expansion to fuel 347B mobile market by 2030



How AI is causing app litter everywhere



The App Economy Is Thriving



NIKKE 3.5 anniversary update livestream coming soon



New AI tool targets early dementia detection



Jentic launch gives AI agents api access



Experts warn ai-generated health content risks misinterpretation without human oversight



Ludo.ai Unveils API and MCP Beta to Power AI Game Asset Pipelines



AccuWeather Launches ChatGPT Integration for Live Weather Updates



Stop Using Business Jargon: 5 Ways Buzzwords Damage Job Performance



IT spending rises as banks balance legacy and innovation



Tech hiring slumps as Software Developer job postings fall



AI is becoming more widespread in collaboration tools



FCC prohibits new foreign router models citing critical infrastructure risks



ChatGPT Carbon Footprint Matches 1.3 Million Cars Report Finds



Lens Launches MCP Server to Connect AI Coding Assistants with Kubernetes



Accelerating corporate ai investment returns



Enviromates tech startup launches global participation platform



Private Repository Secures the AI-driven Development Boom



UK Fintech Platform Enviromates Connects Projects Brands and Consumers



Env Zero and CloudQuery Announce Merger



How Industrial AI Is Transforming Operations in 2026



AI generated work from managers is damaging trust among employees



Foresight Secures $25M to Bridge Infrastructure Execution Gap



Copyright © 2026 by Moonbeam

Address:
1855 S Ingram Mill Rd
STE# 201
Springfield, Mo 65804

Phone: 1-844-277-3386

Fax:417-429-2935

E-Mail: contact@appdevelopermagazine.com