3.8 Proceedings Paper

CoAuthor: Designing a Human-AI Collaborative Writing Dataset for Exploring Language Model Capabilities

Publisher

ASSOC COMPUTING MACHINERY
DOI: 10.1145/3491102.3502030

Keywords

Human-AI collaborative writing; GPT-3; language models; dataset; crowdsourcing; natural language generation; writing assistants

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper discusses the potential and challenges of large language models (LMs) in language generation and proposes the use of curated interaction datasets for more insightful research on their generative capabilities. The COAUTHOR dataset is presented as an example to reveal GPT-3's abilities in creative and argumentative writing. This work contributes to a more principled discussion on the promises and pitfalls of language models in interaction design.
Large language models (LMs) offer unprecedented language generation capabilities and exciting opportunities for interaction design. However, their highly context-dependent capabilities are difficult to grasp and are often subjectively interpreted. In this paper, we argue that by curating and analyzing large interaction datasets, the HCI community can foster more incisive examinations of LMs' generative capabilities. Exemplifying this approach, we present COAUTHOR, a dataset designed for revealing GPT-3's capabilities in assisting creative and argumentative writing. CoAuthor captures rich interactions between 63 writers and four instances of GPT-3 across 1445 writing sessions. We demonstrate that CoAuthor can address questions about GPT-3's language, ideation, and collaboration capabilities, and reveal its contribution as a writing collaborator under various definitions of good collaboration. Finally, we discuss how this work may facilitate a more principled discussion around LMs' promises and pitfalls in relation to interaction design. The dataset and an interface for replaying the writing sessions are publicly available at https://coauthor.stanford.edu.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available