ChatGPT Answers the 110-Question Laboratory Enzymology Student Exam: Pass or Fail?

Introduction Chatbots like ChatGPT have attracted a lot of interest lately due to their ability to generate human-like responses. Their reliability and accuracy are still questionable, and they are the topic of many studies in different fields. Therefore, the aim of this study was to examine the knowledge of two versions of chatbots regarding laboratory enzymology and to compare it with the average knowledge of students for the purpose of considering the use of ChatGPT in providing answers in this field. Material and methods An exam with 110 questions covering four topics was answered by students and ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4.0. The accuracy of the answers of 52 students and ChatGPT was evaluated. The accuracy of answers between students and artificial intelligence was compared, and the percentage of passing the exam was 60%. All responses were reviewed by two authors with full interrater agreement. Results Total scores for students, ChatGPT-3.5, and ChatGPT-4.0 were 85.46%, 52.73%, and 74.55% (p < 0.05), whereby ChatGPT-4.0 achieved better results compared to the other chatbot. ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4.0 achieved the best results on questions about enzymes in metabolism. The lowest scores for both chatbots were observed in the laboratory analysis of enzymes. Conclusion ChatGPT showed average results in the Laboratory Enzymology exam and scored lower than students. This proved that chatbots could be a potential tool for learning and eventual implementation in higher and/or medical education with extensive optimization but still cannot replace a human.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Cureus
Published
2025-04-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.82168
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

ChatGPT Answers the 110-Question Laboratory Enzymology Student Exam: Pass or Fail?

Selvedina Duskan, Berina Hasanefendić, Aleksandra Pasic, Emir Šeherčehajić et al.
Cureus
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
article

ChatGPT Answers the 110-Question Laboratory Enzymology Student Exam: Pass or Fail?

Selvedina Duskan, Berina Hasanefendić, Aleksandra Pasic, Emir Šeherčehajić, Altaira Jazic Durmisevic
article en

Abstract

Introduction Chatbots like ChatGPT have attracted a lot of interest lately due to their ability to generate human-like responses. Their reliability and accuracy are still questionable, and they are the topic of many studies in different fields. Therefore, the aim of this study was to examine the knowledge of two versions of chatbots regarding laboratory enzymology and to compare it with the average knowledge of students for the purpose of considering the use of ChatGPT in providing answers in this field. Material and methods An exam with 110 questions covering four topics was answered by students and ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4.0. The accuracy of the answers of 52 students and ChatGPT was evaluated. The accuracy of answers between students and artificial intelligence was compared, and the percentage of passing the exam was 60%. All responses were reviewed by two authors with full interrater agreement. Results Total scores for students, ChatGPT-3.5, and ChatGPT-4.0 were 85.46%, 52.73%, and 74.55% (p < 0.05), whereby ChatGPT-4.0 achieved better results compared to the other chatbot. ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4.0 achieved the best results on questions about enzymes in metabolism. The lowest scores for both chatbots were observed in the laboratory analysis of enzymes. Conclusion ChatGPT showed average results in the Laboratory Enzymology exam and scored lower than students. This proved that chatbots could be a potential tool for learning and eventual implementation in higher and/or medical education with extensive optimization but still cannot replace a human.

CureusVol. 17(4)
University of Sarajevo (BA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 95%
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.