Papers › Evaluating ChatGPT's Information Extraction Capabilities: An Assessment of...

Evaluating ChatGPT's Information Extraction Capabilities: An Assessment of Performance, Explainability, Calibration, and Faithfulness

23 Apr 2023arXiv:2304.11633archive 2025-07-28

Bo Li, Gexiang Fang, Yang Yang, Quansen Wang, Wei Ye, Wen Zhao, Shikun Zhang

The capability of Large Language Models (LLMs) like ChatGPT to comprehend user intent and provide reasonable responses has made them extremely popular lately. In this paper, we focus on assessing the overall ability of ChatGPT using 7 fine-grained information extraction (IE) tasks. Specially, we present the systematically analysis by measuring ChatGPT's performance, explainability, calibration, and faithfulness, and resulting in 15 keys from either the ChatGPT or domain experts. Our findings reveal that ChatGPT's performance in Standard-IE setting is poor, but it surprisingly exhibits excellent performance in the OpenIE setting, as evidenced by human evaluation. In addition, our research indicates that ChatGPT provides high-quality and trustworthy explanations for its decisions. However, there is an issue of ChatGPT being overconfident in its predictions, which resulting in low calibration. Furthermore, ChatGPT demonstrates a high level of faithfulness to the original text in the majority of cases. We manually annotate and release the test sets of 7 fine-grained IE tasks contains 14 datasets to further promote the research. The datasets and code are available at https://github.com/pkuserc/ChatGPT_for_IE.

Code

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

8 samples harvested; 0 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 8 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

Licence: 0 of the 8 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from pkuserc/chatgpt_for_ie. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Methods

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections