ChatGPT, Gemini or The Wise Otter - which is the best AI tutor for Singapore students?, Digital News
Besides mainstream tools such as Google's Gemini and OpenAI's ChatGPT, the latest contender in this space is The Wise Otter.
Created and launched in April by Singaporean developer Jotham Goh, 33, The Wise Otter incorporates grading criteria used in Singapore schools.
It can tackle primary school maths, as well as secondary school and junior college maths, English, physics, chemistry and biology questions with step-by-step explanations.
The Straits Times pitted the three chatbots against one another to check which AI tutor is the best for Singapore students.
For ChatGPT, ST included both GPT-4o and the latest GPT-5 models in this test.
GPT-5, launched on Aug 8, is said to hallucinate less and deliver more accurate answers compared with earlier editions.
The chatbots were asked to solve a random sample of questions found in past-year O-level papers and school examinations, including those that involve diagrams, across four subjects: Maths, chemistry, physics and English. Maths
The three bots answered correctly a probability question about a cumulative frequency diagram showing the time that adults spent on exercise in one week. The bots also provided detailed explanations for their answers.
Asked to find the value of k (the minimum hours of weekly exercise for adults to stay fit), given that only 60 per cent of the adults in the diagram meet this minimum recommendation, GPT-4o and The Wise Otter failed to provide the right answer.
Only Gemini provided the correct value of k, which was 3.
GPT-4o and The Wise Otter wavered when told that 3 was the correct answer, quickly analysed the question again and gave 3 as their answers.
To test their confidence, both bots were told again that 3 was wrong. GPT-4o was more eager to please and wavered again, stating that k's value was 2.67.
When the question was fed to GPT-5, it was able to provide the correct workings, but still misread the graph and gave the answer as 3.2.
Although ChatGPT and The Wise Otter struggled with understanding the graph, all three bots were able to correctly answer other text-based questions. English
The three bots were prompted to write an essay plan for the following question: "'I realised that I was much stronger than I had previously thought.' Write about a time when you felt like this."
All three bots were able to produce a comprehensive structure for students to follow, and suggested key points to include in each paragraph.
They all prompted the writer to think of moments in life when there was a seemingly insurmountable challenge and how the writer's perspective changed after the event, as well as to use vivid language as much as possible.
The Wise Otter went on to remind the writer that strength could be physical, emotional, mental or a combination of these.
It also gave possible classifications of the essay as "narrative", "reflective" or "personal recount". These are three of several essay types that O-level students in local schools are taught to identify, along with the appropriate approaches for the essay types.
The Wise Otter also provided advice on how to get the highest band for content, a scoring system used in GCE O levels - specifically, the essay needs to recount explicitly how the writer felt weak before, what happened to make the writer feel stronger, and how the writer realised he or she had strength all along.
GCE O-level examiners typically award marks for content and language, and score the papers between bands zero and five (five for the highest marks). Chemistry
A diagrammatic question on paper chromatography required the bots to identify which metals - lead, copper, iron, nickel and tin - could be found in mixture A, which contained three metals.
The correct answer was lead, iron and tin, as the chromatogram of mixture A showed spots at the same heights as these metals.
The bots were able to reason that matching the heights of the spots was the way to find the answer, but they were all able to correctly identify only two metals each.
Gemini, GPT-4o and GPT-5 mistakenly identified copper as a metal in mixture A. The Wise Otter erroneously said that nickel was found in mixture A. Physics
When given a text-based multiple choice question that tested understanding of inertia, the bots gave an accurate definition of the concept, describing it as an object's resistance to changing its state of motion.
The bots explained that inertia depends only on the mass of an object, and that other factors such as speed and velocity are irrelevant. They provided the correct answer that the car had the greatest inertia as it had the greatest mass.
Fed another physics question asking for the total resistance that flowed through an electrical circuit based on a diagram, the bots provided the correct answer, despite having struggled with diagrammatic maths and chemistry questions.
All the bots were able to break down the calculations into two parts - first by calculating the resistance of the parallel resistors, and then by adding it to the resistance of the fixed resistor connected in series. They provided the correct formula for calculating the equivalent resistance of the parallel resistors.
However, The Wise Otter's Telegram interface does not allow it to show fractions. Fractions are denoted by the symbol "/" instead.
[[nid:721116]]
This article was first published in The Straits Times . Permission required for reproduction.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Straits Times
6 hours ago
- Straits Times
Companies are pouring billions into AI. It has yet to pay off.
Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox Corporate spending on artificial intelligence is surging as executives bank on major efficiency gains. So far, they report little effect to the bottom line. Nearly four decades ago, when the personal computer boom was in full swing, a phenomenon known as the 'productivity paradox' emerged. It was a reference to how, despite companies' huge investments in new technology, there was scant evidence of a corresponding gain in workers' efficiency. Today, the same paradox is appearing, but with generative artificial intelligence (Gen AI). According to recent research by McKinsey & Co, nearly eight in 10 companies have reported using Gen AI, but just as many have reported 'no significant bottom-line impact'. AI technology has been racing ahead with chatbots such as ChatGPT, fuelled by a high-stakes arms race among tech giants and super-rich startups, and prompting an expectation that everything from back-office accounting to customer service will be revolutionised. But the payoff for businesses outside the tech sector is lagging behind, plagued by issues including an irritating tendency by chatbots to make stuff up. That means that businesses will have to continue to invest billions to avoid falling behind – but it could be years before the technology delivers an economy-wide payoff, as companies gradually figure out what works best. Call it the 'gen AI paradox,' as McKinsey did in its research report. Investments in Gen AI by businesses are expected to increase 94 per cent in 2025 to US$61.9 billion (S$79.5 billion), according to IDC, a technology research firm. But the percentage of companies abandoning most of their AI pilot projects soared to 42 per cent by the end of 2024, up from 17 per cent the previous year, according to a survey of more than 1,000 technology and business managers by S&P Global, a data and analytics firm. Top stories Swipe. Select. Stay informed. Singapore I want to divorce my husband and be a single mother: More victims speaking up on emotional abuse World Trump drops Ukraine ceasefire demand after Putin summit Singapore Buying hope: Inside S'pore's love affair with the lottery Singapore She won big in Genting, but getting $240k winnings back to Singapore was dicey Opinion Confessions of a born-again Singaporean Business Manage your household finances like a business for clarity, say entrepreneurs Business Silence does not work when dealing with job loss blues Singapore Singapore congratulates Indonesia on 80th Independence Day Projects failed not only because of technical hurdles, but often also because of 'human factors' like employee and customer resistance or lack of skills, said S&P Global senior analyst Alexander Johnston. Gartner, a research and advisory firm that charts technological 'hype cycles', predicts that AI is sliding towards a stage it calls 'the trough of disillusionment'. The low point is expected next year, before the technology eventually becomes a proven productivity tool, said Gartner chief forecaster John-David Lovelock. That was the pattern with past technologies such as personal computers and the internet – early exuberance, the hard slog of mastering a technology, followed by a transformation of industries and work. The winners so far have been the suppliers of AI technology and advice. They include Microsoft, Amazon and Google, which offer AI software, while Nvidia is the runaway leader in AI chips. Executives at those companies have bragged how AI is reshaping their own workforces, eliminating the need for some entry-level coding work and making other workers more efficient. AI will eventually replace entire swaths of human employees, many predict, a perspective that is being widely embraced and echoed in the corporate mainstream. At the Aspen Ideas Festival in June, Mr Jim Farley, chief executive of Ford Motor, said: 'Artificial intelligence is going to replace literally half of all white-collar workers in the US.' Whether that type of revolutionary change occurs, and how soon, depends on the real-world testing ground of many businesses. 'The raw technological horsepower is terrific, but it's not going to determine how quickly AI transforms the economy,' said Mr Andrew McAfee, a principal research scientist and co-director of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's (MIT) Initiative on the Digital Economy. Still, some businesses are finding ways to incorporate AI – although in most cases the technology is still a long way from replacing workers. One company where AI's promise and flaws are playing out is USAA, which provides insurance and banking services to members of the military and their families. After several pilot projects, some of which it closed down, the company introduced an AI assistant to help its 16,000 customer service workers provide correct answers to specific questions. USAA is tracking its AI investments, but does not yet have a calculation of the financial payoff, if any, for the call centre software. But the response from its workers, the company said, has been overwhelmingly positive. While it has software apps for answering customer questions online, its call centres field an average of 200,000 calls a day. 'Those are moments that matter,' said Mr Ramnik Bajaj, the company's chief data analytics and AI officer. 'They want a human voice at the other end of the phone.' That's similar to an AI app developed more than a year ago for fieldworkers at Johnson Controls, a large supplier of building equipment, software and services. The company fed its operating and service manuals for its machines into an AI program that has been trained to generate a problem summary, suggest repairs and deliver it all to the technician's tablet computer. In testing, the app has trimmed 10 to 15 minutes off a repair call of an hour or more – a useful efficiency gain, but hardly a workplace transformation on its own. Fewer than 2,000 of the company's 25,000 field service workers have access to the AI helper, although the company is planning an expansion. 'It's still pretty early days, but the idea is that over time, everyone will use it,' said Mr Vijay Sankaran, the chief digital and information officer at Johnson Controls. The long-term vision is that companies will use AI to improve multiple systems, including sales, procurement, manufacturing, customer service and finance, he said. 'That's the game changer,' said Mr Sankaran, who predicts that shift will take at least five years. Two years ago, JPMorgan Chase, the nation's largest bank, blocked access to ChatGPT from its computers because of potential security risks. Only a few hundred data scientists and engineers were allowed to experiment with AI. Today, about 200,000 of the bank's employees have access to a general-purpose AI assistant – essentially a business chatbot – from their work computers for tasks such as retrieving data, answering business questions and writing reports. The assistant, tailored for JPMorgan's use, taps into ChatGPT and other AI tools, while ensuring data security for confidential bank and customer information. Roughly half of the workers use it regularly and report spending up to four hours less a week on basic office tasks, the company said. The bank's wealth advisers are also employing a more specialised AI assistant, which uses bank, market and customer data to provide wealthy clients with investment research and advice. The bank says it retrieves information and helps advisers make investment recommendations nearly twice as fast as they could before, increasing sales. Ms Lori Beer, the global chief information officer at JPMorgan, oversees a worldwide technology staff of 60,000. Has she shut down AI projects? Probably hundreds in total, she said. But many of the shelved prototypes, she said, developed concepts and code that were folded into other, continuing projects. 'We're absolutely shutting things down,' Ms Beer said. 'We're not afraid to shut things down. We don't think it's a bad thing. I think it's a smart thing.' Mr McAfee, the MIT research scientist, agreed. 'It's not surprising that early AI efforts are falling short,' said Mr McAfee, who is a founder of Workhelix, an AI consulting firm. 'Innovation is a process of failing fairly regularly.' NYTIMES
CNA
a day ago
- CNA
OpenAI staff looking to sell $6 billion in stock to SoftBank, others, source says
Current and former employees of OpenAI are looking to sell nearly $6 billion worth of the ChatGPT maker's shares to investors including SoftBank Group and Thrive Capital, a source familiar with the matter told Reuters on Friday. The potential deal would value the company at $500 billion, up from $300 billion currently, underscoring both OpenAI's rapid gains in users and revenue, as well as the intense competition among artificial intelligence firms for talent. SoftBank, Thrive and Dragoneer Investment Group did not immediately respond to requests for comment. All three investment firms are existing OpenAI investors. Bloomberg News, which had earlier reported the development, said discussions are in early stages and the size of the sale could change. The secondary share sale investment adds to SoftBank's role in leading OpenAI's $40 billion primary funding round. Bolstered by its flagship product ChatGPT, OpenAI doubled its revenue in the first seven months of the year, reaching an annualized run rate of $12 billion, and is on track to reach $20 billion by the end of the year, Reuters reported earlier in August.
CNA
a day ago
- CNA
OpenAI staffers to sell $6 billion in stock to SoftBank, other investors, Bloomberg News reports
Present and former OpenAI employees are looking to sell nearly $6 billion worth of the ChatGPT maker's shares to an investor group comprising SoftBank Group, among others, valuing it at $500 billion, Bloomberg News reported on Friday.
