风险交流和大型语言模型

IF 1.9 Q3 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy Pub Date : 2024-05-03 DOI:10.1002/rhc3.12303
Daniel Sledge, Herschel F. Thomas
{"title":"风险交流和大型语言模型","authors":"Daniel Sledge, Herschel F. Thomas","doi":"10.1002/rhc3.12303","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The widespread embrace of Large Language Models (LLMs) integrated with chatbot interfaces, such as ChatGPT, represents a potentially critical moment in the development of risk communication and management. In this article, we consider the implications of the current wave of LLM‐based chat programs for risk communication. We examine ChatGPT‐generated responses to 24 different hazard situations. We compare these responses to guidelines published for public consumption on the US Department of Homeland Security's <jats:ext-link xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\" xlink:href=\"http://Ready.gov\">Ready.gov</jats:ext-link> website. We find that, although ChatGPT did not generate false or misleading responses, ChatGPT responses were typically less than optimal in terms of their similarity to guidances from the federal government. While delivered in an authoritative tone, these responses at times omitted important information and contained points of emphasis that were substantially different than those from <jats:ext-link xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\" xlink:href=\"http://Ready.gov\">Ready.gov</jats:ext-link>. Moving forward, it is critical that researchers and public officials both seek to harness the power of LLMs to inform the public and acknowledge the challenges represented by a potential shift in information flows away from public officials and experts and towards individuals.","PeriodicalId":21362,"journal":{"name":"Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Risk communication and large language models\",\"authors\":\"Daniel Sledge, Herschel F. Thomas\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/rhc3.12303\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The widespread embrace of Large Language Models (LLMs) integrated with chatbot interfaces, such as ChatGPT, represents a potentially critical moment in the development of risk communication and management. In this article, we consider the implications of the current wave of LLM‐based chat programs for risk communication. We examine ChatGPT‐generated responses to 24 different hazard situations. We compare these responses to guidelines published for public consumption on the US Department of Homeland Security's <jats:ext-link xmlns:xlink=\\\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\\\" xlink:href=\\\"http://Ready.gov\\\">Ready.gov</jats:ext-link> website. We find that, although ChatGPT did not generate false or misleading responses, ChatGPT responses were typically less than optimal in terms of their similarity to guidances from the federal government. While delivered in an authoritative tone, these responses at times omitted important information and contained points of emphasis that were substantially different than those from <jats:ext-link xmlns:xlink=\\\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\\\" xlink:href=\\\"http://Ready.gov\\\">Ready.gov</jats:ext-link>. Moving forward, it is critical that researchers and public officials both seek to harness the power of LLMs to inform the public and acknowledge the challenges represented by a potential shift in information flows away from public officials and experts and towards individuals.\",\"PeriodicalId\":21362,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/rhc3.12303\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/rhc3.12303","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

大语言模型(LLM)与聊天机器人界面(如 ChatGPT)的广泛结合,代表了风险交流和管理发展的一个潜在关键时刻。在本文中,我们将探讨当前基于 LLM 的聊天程序浪潮对风险交流的影响。我们研究了 ChatGPT 生成的对 24 种不同危险情况的反应。我们将这些回复与美国国土安全部 Ready.gov 网站上发布的公众指南进行了比较。我们发现,虽然 ChatGPT 没有生成错误或误导性的回复,但 ChatGPT 的回复在与联邦政府指南的相似度方面通常不尽如人意。虽然这些回复以权威的口吻表达,但有时会遗漏重要信息,其强调的重点也与 Ready.gov 中的内容大相径庭。展望未来,研究人员和政府官员都必须努力利用 LLM 的力量向公众提供信息,并承认信息流可能从政府官员和专家转向个人所带来的挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Risk communication and large language models
The widespread embrace of Large Language Models (LLMs) integrated with chatbot interfaces, such as ChatGPT, represents a potentially critical moment in the development of risk communication and management. In this article, we consider the implications of the current wave of LLM‐based chat programs for risk communication. We examine ChatGPT‐generated responses to 24 different hazard situations. We compare these responses to guidelines published for public consumption on the US Department of Homeland Security's Ready.gov website. We find that, although ChatGPT did not generate false or misleading responses, ChatGPT responses were typically less than optimal in terms of their similarity to guidances from the federal government. While delivered in an authoritative tone, these responses at times omitted important information and contained points of emphasis that were substantially different than those from Ready.gov. Moving forward, it is critical that researchers and public officials both seek to harness the power of LLMs to inform the public and acknowledge the challenges represented by a potential shift in information flows away from public officials and experts and towards individuals.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
8.60%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: Scholarship on risk, hazards, and crises (emergencies, disasters, or public policy/organizational crises) has developed into mature and distinct fields of inquiry. Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy (RHCPP) addresses the governance implications of the important questions raised for the respective fields. The relationships between risk, hazards, and crisis raise fundamental questions with broad social science and policy implications. During unstable situations of acute or chronic danger and substantial uncertainty (i.e. a crisis), important and deeply rooted societal institutions, norms, and values come into play. The purpose of RHCPP is to provide a forum for research and commentary that examines societies’ understanding of and measures to address risk,hazards, and crises, how public policies do and should address these concerns, and to what effect. The journal is explicitly designed to encourage a broad range of perspectives by integrating work from a variety of disciplines. The journal will look at social science theory and policy design across the spectrum of risks and crises — including natural and technological hazards, public health crises, terrorism, and societal and environmental disasters. Papers will analyze the ways societies deal with both unpredictable and predictable events as public policy questions, which include topics such as crisis governance, loss and liability, emergency response, agenda setting, and the social and cultural contexts in which hazards, risks and crises are perceived and defined. Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy invites dialogue and is open to new approaches. We seek scholarly work that combines academic quality with practical relevance. We especially welcome authors writing on the governance of risk and crises to submit their manuscripts.
期刊最新文献
“Fight or flight”—A study of frontline emergency response workforce's perceived knowledge, and motivation to work during hazards Unequal burials: Medicolegal death investigation system variation as a determinant of FEMA's disaster funeral assistance allocation Translating global norms into national action. Insights from the implementation of societal security norms in Sweden Innovation and adaption in local governments in the face of COVID‐19: Determinants of effective crisis management Explaining regulatory change in the European Union: The role of the financial crisis in ratcheting up of risk regulation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1