ChatGPT Hallucinates Non-existent Citations: Evidence from Economics

In this study, we generate prompts derived from every topic within the Journal of Economic Literature to assess the abilities of both GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 versions of the ChatGPT large language model (LLM) to write about economic concepts. ChatGPT demonstrates considerable competency in offering genera...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The American Economist (New York, N.Y. 1960) N.Y. 1960), 2024-03, Vol.69 (1), p.80-87
Main Authors: Buchanan, Joy, Hill, Stephen, Shapoval, Olga
Format: Article
Language:English
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:In this study, we generate prompts derived from every topic within the Journal of Economic Literature to assess the abilities of both GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 versions of the ChatGPT large language model (LLM) to write about economic concepts. ChatGPT demonstrates considerable competency in offering general summaries but also cites non-existent references. More than 30% of the citations provided by the GPT-3.5 version do not exist and this rate is only slightly reduced for the GPT-4 version. Additionally, our findings suggest that the reliability of the model decreases as the prompts become more specific. We provide quantitative evidence for errors in ChatGPT output to demonstrate the importance of LLM verification. JEL Codes: B4; O33; I2
ISSN:0569-4345
2328-1235
DOI:10.1177/05694345231218454