Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
This study presents a comprehensive analysis comparing the literacy levels of two Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI) tools, ChatGPT and Bard, using a dataset of 134 questions from the Human Resources (HR) domain. The generated responses are evaluated for accuracy, relevance, and clarity. We find that ChatGPT outperforms Bard in overall accuracy (84.3% vs. 82.8%). This difference in performance suggests that ChatGPT could serve as a robotic advisor in transactional HR roles. In contrast, Bard may possess additional safeguards against misuse in the HR function, making it less capable of generating responses to certain types of questions. Statistical tests reveal that although the two systems differ in their mean accuracy, relevance, and clarity of the responses, the observed differences are not always statistically significant, implying that both tools may be more complementary than competitive. The Pearson correlation coefficients further support this by showing weak to non-existent relationships in performance metrics between the two tools. Confirmation queries don't improve ChatGPT or Bard's response accuracy. The study thus contributes to emerging research on the utility of GAI tools in Human Resources Management and suggests that involving certified HR professionals in the design phase could enhance underlying language model performance.
Raman et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: