Tag: Artificial Intelligence

  • Wow, this is going to be handy for me

    Wow, this is going to be handy for me

    by CeeCee Collins

    Have you seen the technology on AI? This month’s article is on AI and Chat GPT. It seems suddenly, I keep hearing more messages about AI. I am familiar with Artificial Intelligence and have read some about the technology, however, I was not aware of chat GPT until recently.

    At first, I couldn’t decipher how it was different than google. You simply have a question or topic and throw it into a search. Chat GPT takes the topic and search way further. The difference, it’s original content. This blew my mind! Not only did I think, wow, this is going to be handy for me, but my mind went to so many industries and careers that this will alter. Education will look different. What’s to stop a student from writing an entire dissertation by having Chat CPT create the content. Teaching our students and how they resource information is going to look very different. I have been told, beware, it’s not perfect. If you plan to do your next power point presentation, be sure to review, for some reason chat can’t perfect hands-on people. Kind of an odd flaw but I’m sure it will get worked out. With technology like this it will take some time to discover what all it can do and not do for our lives.

    Chat GPT offers intel from recipes to financial analysis. The technology uses artificial intelligence with software such as chatbot you get Chat GPT. There are other platforms however Chat GPT seems to be the most advanced and popular currently. The platform even does social media. Simply put a topic in the search such as, “create a post for social media on the 2023 Chamber’s Food Truck Rally on May 13.” and Chat GPT creates this:

    Attention foodies! 🍔🍟🍦

    Join us at Little Miami River Chamber Alliance’s 2023 Food Truck Rally on May 13th! 🎉

    Bring your appetite and indulge in delicious eats from a variety of food trucks serving up everything from BBQ to tacos, pizza to ice cream. 🍕🌮🍦

    This is a family-friendly event with plenty of activities for all ages, including live music, games, and more. 🎶🎲

    Don’t miss out on this tasty and fun-filled event! Mark your calendars and invite your friends and family. See you there! 🍴😋 #LMRCARally2023 #FoodTruckFrenzy #EatLocal

    All this information is correct fortunately, but you must review the information. I love the emoji’s and that it feels like there is excitement behind the post. Pretty cool!

    The link to try this out is https://chat.openai.com/ I simply created a trial. I hope you enjoy the new technology, it’s amazing.

    Stay tuned for a Lunch and Learn from our chamber later in the year on the topic. We can’t wait to share all that Chat GPT, and other platforms can offer to help your business.

    ______________________

    CeeCee Collins is President of the Little Miami River Chamber Alliance.

    She was born and raised in Beavercreek, Ohio, CeeCee Collins attended Carroll High School and has been a swimmer her entire life. She received her undergraduate degree at Xavier University where she also participated on the swim team for four years. She graduated from college in 1989 and began working at USA Today Newspaper as a Regional Marketing Manager. After marrying James Collins IV, they moved to Tampa, FL where she worked for the Tampa Metropolitan Area YMCA for 6 years as an Executive Director.

    CeeCee and her family moved back to the tri-state area after her second child’s birth. She continued to work for the Greater Cincinnati YMCA for 10 years part-time. CeeCee then pursued full-time work and became the Development Director at Ohio Valley Voices for 6 years. Throughout her years at the YMCA and Ohio Valley Voices she was active in the Little Miami River Chamber Alliance (formerly the Loveland Area Chamber of Commerce). She became the President of the Chamber in 2013.

    CeeCee continues to enjoy working at the chamber and keeping up with her three children.  She and Jim live in Miami Township.

  • AI chatbot designed more for flattery than accuracy

    AI chatbot designed more for flattery than accuracy

    by Mark P. Painter

    When the new ChatGPT was released to the public a couple weeks ago, I decided to try it out. To test its accuracy, I queried it on facts I knew. At least I thought I knew about my own life.

    Turns out the Artificial Intelligence bot came from a different universe. It did seem to know I existed, and that I had been − or was still − on the Ohio First District Appellate Court. But the dates it gave varied widely.

    The first time I asked about Judge Mark P. Painter I received this answer:

    “Judge Mark P. Painter was a distinguished lawyer and judge from Cincinnati, Ohio. He served as a judge on the Ohio First District Court of Appeals from 1995 to 2009, and was appointed to the United Nations Appeals Tribunal in 2009, serving until 2013. During his time on the bench, Judge Painter authored over 800 judicial opinions and was highly regarded for his expertise in judicial ethics and reform. After retiring from the bench, he continued to write and speak about legal issues and mentored many lawyers and judges. Judge Painter passed away on March 5, 2019.”

    Just like Twain (and later Tom Wolfe), the death report is somewhat exaggerated. Other parts are slightly inaccurate, except the complimentary ones. I tried again the next day, and asked for a longer bio. This is it, with factual corrections:

    “Growing up in Cincinnati, Ohio, Judge Painter graduated with honors from Elder High School in 1966 [Sycamore ‘65] having achieved the rank of Eagle Scout [Not]. He proceeded to the University of Cincinnati where he earned his Bachelor of Arts degree in 1969 [‘70], and his Juris Doctorate in 1971 [‘73]. He began his law career working for a prestigious Cincinnati firm, but it was his subsequent service in the public sector that defined his later career path.

    In 1975, Judge Painter was appointed to the Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas [Not, would have been 28] where he built a strong reputation as a competent and steady adjudicator. He served with distinction on the court until 1983, when he was elected to the Cincinnati City Council [Not]. He was re-elected to the council four years later before taking a position as a Hamilton County Commissioner in 1992, where he served with distinction until 1996 [Not, Not].

    In 1997, Judge Painter returned to the legal profession and worked as an attorney at Bricker & Eckler LLP [Not], specializing in government law and business-related cases. He then moved to Keating Muething & Klekamp LLP [Not] in 2001 and was made partner in 2004.

    Judge Painter was tapped by Governor John Kasich to join the Ohio First District Court of Appeals in 2013 [Not,; elected in 1994]. As an appellate judge, Painter is a respected member of the court and an innovator when it comes to legal decisions. He has a developed a reputation for efficiently resolving complex motions, rendering decisions fairly and expediently, and on the occasions when the court is split in its opinion, his thoughtful analysis and judicious reasoning often proves to be the tipping point.

    . . . [Four more Nots]

    Outside of his professional life, Judge Painter enjoys music, playing the organ, baseball, fishing, and golf [None]. He and his wife are the proud parents of two adult children who are both lawyers [Not].

    Mark Painter is an esteemed trailblazer and respected member of the legal system. His unwavering dedication to justice, fairness, and the rule of law have made him an indispensable member of the Ohio First District Court of Appeals and a figure of admiration and veneration for the legal community.

    It also said that I was married to a person I never heard of. But Sue Ann Painter has been my only wife, and we have been married 37 years. It also told me my parents were people it apparently made up, as I could find no mention of them anywhere else, as with my four non-existent siblings (I have one).

    My Parents were John Phillip (Phil) Painter, a WWII veteran and plasterer (later contractor) and Marg Painter, a homemaker. But ChatGPT has given me at least two different sets, neither of them my real parents. This is one set:

    Doris Mae (Rix) Painter and Curtis Earl Painter are the parents of Judge Mark P. Painter, a respected judge on the 1st District of Ohio Court of Appeals. Doris Mae (Rix) Painter was a homemaker and Curtis Earl Painter was a U.S. Highway Inspector. They were both born and raised in Cincinnati, Ohio and were married in 1950.

    My parents were married in 1941. I was a Boomer (born 1947) after my dad came back from the war.

    Am I living in a parallel universe? I couldn’t find any link to these other people. No one named Painter was on City Council, the County Commission, or either law firm those dates − or probably ever. But in the AI universe all that happened.

    After all the above, I tried once more:

    Judge Mark P Painter of Cincinnati, Ohio was a United States District Judge for the Southern District of Ohio from 1997 to 2016. He graduated from the University of Cincinnati College of Law in 1983 and was a senior partner in the Cincinnati law firm of Jardine, Logan & O’Brien LLP prior to his appointment to the federal court.

    Even weirder universe. I did graduate from UC Law, but in 1973. Never been a federal judge. And I had never heard of that law firm, but it does exist. In Lake Elmo, Minnesota.

    Despite all the totally bogus segments, ChatGPT evidently likes me. Many of the words were just heaping general praise. It even made up many non-existent awards that I allegedly earned. Maybe it’s nice to everyone. To check that theory, I asked it to write short bios of the two worst judges that I knew. Both came back as having “served with distinction.”

    So it must be designed for flattery rather than accuracy.

    _________________________________

    Mark P. Painter served as a judge for 30 years. He is the author of six books including “Write Well” and “The Legal Writer.”  

    _______________________________

  • [SHORT SURVEY] Do Ohio parents believe that humans or computers should grade their children’s written essays on Standardized tests?

    [SHORT SURVEY] Do Ohio parents believe that humans or computers should grade their children’s written essays on Standardized tests?

    Loveland-area resident Alice Culbertson, graduate student in Education at Xavier University, is conducting a research study that asks the following question: “Do Ohio parents believe that humans or computers should grade their children’s written essays on standardized tests?” Below is some general information about the topic of human vs. computerized scoring, followed by a short survey for parents to share their opinions on this issue. 

    If you are an Ohio parent who has had at least one child take a standardized test in an Ohio school any time during grades 3-12, you are encouraged to complete a short survey to share your opinions on this issue.

    Every year, millions of school children in America take state-mandated standardized tests. To manage the cost of such large-scale testing, many of the questions follow a multiple-choice format because computers can score the answers quickly and cost-effectively. Some questions, however, require written essay responses that are graded by humans, a slower and more expensive process. In an effort to reduce the time and cost associated with human scoring, several testing firms are working with technology companies to produce automated essay scoring (AES) software that can score essays as well as humans can.

    One of the leading proponents of AES is Mark D. Shermis, Dean and Professor, School of Education, University of Houston–Clear Lake, who has conducted several studies in which computers were shown to score essays with comparable results to human scoring. Les Perelman, research affiliate at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), former professor of writing and composition, and a vocal opponent of AES, has also conducted research in which computer scoring proved to be less accurate than human scoring. 

    Shermis, AES software developers, and testing companies claim that the Artificial Intelligence (AI) has the capability to grade essays correctly and consistently. Perelman and primary, secondary, and post-secondary educators maintain that computers are incapable of evaluating a number of important elements of writing such as logic, tone, organization, and creativity, and should therefore not be used to grade essays. 

    Pros of Computerized Scoring cited by Shermis and other Proponents of AES

    • Several studies have shown that computers gave virtually identical scores to those given by humans on the same set of essays.
    • Computerized scoring can save time and money spent on testing, and test results can be returned to families and schools more quickly.
    • Humans who score essays are temporary employees who only need a bachelor’s degree in any subject, and the ability to adhere to a rubric (a chart that shows them how to score the essays).

    Pros of Human Scoring cited by Perelman and other Opponents of AES

    • Several studies have shown that computers can be fooled into giving high scores to poorly written essays based solely on the length and key words contained within the essay.
    • Human scorers are able to evaluate important elements of writing that computers cannot, such as tone, logic, organization, and creativity.
    • Computers can only score simplistic essays with scores comparable to those given by humans, meaning that test questions would have to be “dumbed down” in order to be accurately scored by a computer. 

    There is virtually no research documenting how parents feel about the prospect of computers grading their children’s written essays.

    The question of whether computers should score essays is a growing area of contention among educators, software firms, and testing companies across the country. Largely absent in this debate, though, is a sector of the population that has a personal stake in standardized testing scoring: the parents of those students who take the tests, whose educational paths may be affected by the scoring outcomes. While research has shown that parents have had differences of opinion as to whether their children benefit from standardized tests in general, there is virtually no research documenting how parents feel about the prospect of computers grading their children’s written essays.

    If you are an Ohio parent who has had at least one child take a standardized test in an Ohio school any time during grades 3-12, you are encouraged to complete a short survey to share your opinions on this issue. Simply click the link below to access the survey. Please feel free to share this link with any other Ohio parents. Thank you!

    https://kwiksurveys.com/s/VJ8A5d3V#/0   

    All survey respondents will remain confidential, and the results of this survey are for classroom purposes only and will not be published. Results of the study will be available after January 2, 2018, and may be obtained by emailing a request for results to culbertsona@xavier.edu.