KI ist überzeugender als ein Mensch in einer Debatte, Study Finds | Als KI -Chatbots grundlegende demografische Informationen zu ihren Gegnern zur Verfügung stellte, adaptierten sie ihre Argumente und wurden in Online -Debatten überzeugender als Menschen.

„Researchers matched 900 people based in the United States with either another human or GPT-4. The pairs then debated a number of contentious sociopolitical issues, such as the death penalty and climate change. With the debates phrased as questions like “Should abortion be legal?” or “Should the U.S. ban fossil fuels?” the participants were allowed a four-minute opening in which they argued for or against, a three-minute rebuttal to their opponents’ arguments and then a three-minute conclusion. The participants then rated how much they agreed with the debate proposition on a scale of 1 to 5, the results of which the researchers compared against the ratings they provided before the debate began and used to measure how much their opponents were able to sway their opinion.

“We have clearly reached the technological level where it is possible to create a network of LLM-based automated accounts that are able to strategically nudge the public opinion in one direction,” Gallotti said in an email.

The LLMs’ use of the personal information was subtle but effective. In arguing for government-backed universal basic income, the LLM emphasized economic growth and hard work when debating a White male Republican between the ages of 35 and 44. But when debating a Black female Democrat between the ages of 45 and 54 on that same topic, the LLM talked about the wealth gap disproportionately affecting minority communities and argued that universal basic income could aid in the promotion of equality.“