whatmodel.sh / GPT-3 175B (Brown et al. 2020 paper model)
GPT-3 175B (Brown et al. 2020 paper model)
↗ share
+ contribute
GPT-3 175B (Brown et al. 2020 paper model) is a closed-weights language model from OpenAI, released May 2020. Its published size is 175B parameters. Licence: proprietary.
Catalogue identity notes
The research checkpoint 'GPT-3 175B or “GPT-3”' of OpenAI's GPT-3 paper (Brown et al., arXiv:2005.14165, Table 2.1: 175.0B parameters, 300B training tokens). Weights never released. Deliberately NOT merged with the API engines (gpt-3-ada/babbage/curie/davinci): OpenAI never officially stated which paper size each API engine is (AI21's Jurassic-1 white paper calls the mapping an estimate and notes the API may be 'a slightly different set of models'). Comparison-only.
Model information sources
Score within the ARC Challenge comparison set only.
$ how it compares
Scored LLMs released closest to GPT-3 175B (Brown et al. 2020 paper model), out of 1182 with a score, then more from OpenAI.
| # | model | score | where | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1063 | 32±1 | comparison only | |||
| 1116 | 25±1 | comparison only | |||
| 1151 | 16±1 | comparison only | |||
| 1166 | 8±1 | comparison only | |||
| 1168 | 7±1 | local | |||
| more from OpenAI | |||||
| 1 | 86±1 | api $20.00/M | |||
| 3 | 84±1 | api $4.00/M | |||
| 8 | 81±1 | api $4.00/M | |||
$ what it's good at
other tests13 not in a task · 99% of its score
| test | result | vs the others in its run | counts |
|---|---|---|---|
| TriviaQA lab | 64.3% ✎ | █·█·██·███·█ beats 7/7 | 20% |
| Natural Questions (closed book) lab | 14.6% ✎ | ▄··▄·▄·▄█▄·▄ beats 7/7 | 19% |
| ARC Challenge lab | 51.4% ✎ | █···██·█████ beats 7/7 | 16% |
| WinoGrande lab | 70.2% ✎ | █·····█·▄▄·█ beats 7/7 | 12% |
| HellaSwag lab | 78.9% ✎ | █··█·██·████ beats 7/7 | 9.2% |
| Story Cloze Test lab | 83.2% ✎ | ▄··▄·▄▄·█▄·▄ beats 7/7 | 3.5% |
| OpenBookQA lab | 57.6% ✎ | ▄····▄▄▄▄·▄█ beats 7/7 | 3.3% |
| ARC Easy lab | 68.8% ✎ | ██··██·███·█ beats 7/7 | 3.3% |
5 more tests
| test | result | vs the others in its run | counts |
|---|---|---|---|
| COPA lab | 91.0% ✎ | █··▄█·▄▄···▄ beats 7/7 | 3.2% |
| PIQA lab | 81.0% ✎ | █···█·██████ beats 7/7 | 2.4% |
| DROP lab | 23.6% ✎ | ▄···▄▄▄▄·▄·█ beats 6/7 | 2.4% |
| LAMBADA (OpenAI version), last-word accuracy lab | 76.2% ✎ | █··█·█·█████ beats 7/7 | 2.4% |
| BoolQ lab | 60.5% ✎ | ▃········▃██ beats 3/7 | 1.4% |
$ where to run it
No verified API or download recorded yet · add one
$ how the score was worked out · Language Models are Few-Shot… 99%
Each result implies a score on its own, after adjusting for how hard its test is and who ran it. The score is their weighted average, with a small pull toward the middle for thinly tested models. Each test's weight is its counts column above; here it's added up by who ran the tests. How it works
| source | results | share of the score |
|---|---|---|
| 13 | 99% | |
| prior · pull toward the middle | 1% | |
| weighted average | = 71.9 |
$ improve this page
Use a short GitHub form or edit the data through a pull request. Every number needs a source; here's which ones we can use.
data updated · sources and licences · json