The rapid advancements in generative AI models present new opportunities in the education sector. However, it is imperative to acknowledge and address the potential risks and concerns that may arise with their use. We collected Twitter data to identify key concerns related to the use of ChatGPT in education. This dataset is used to support the study "ChatGPT in education: A discourse analysis of worries and concerns on social media."

In this study, we particularly explored two research questions. RQ1 (Concerns): What are the key concerns that Twitter users perceive with using ChatGPT in education? RQ2 (Accounts): Which accounts are implicated in the discussion of these concerns? In summary, our study underscores the importance of responsible and ethical use of AI in education and highlights the need for collaboration among stakeholders to regulate AI policy.

In 2023, more than***** of Polish respondents had no opinion on whether ChatGPT would store wrong information in the algorithm's database.

IntroductionIn recent years, numerous AI tools have been employed to equip learners with diverse technical skills such as coding, data analysis, and other competencies related to computational sciences. However, the desired outcomes have not been consistently achieved. This study aims to analyze the perspectives of students and professionals from non-computational fields on the use of generative AI tools, augmented with visualization support, to tackle data analytics projects. The focus is on promoting the development of coding skills and fostering a deep understanding of the solutions generated. Consequently, our research seeks to introduce innovative approaches for incorporating visualization and generative AI tools into educational practices.MethodsThis article examines how learners perform and their perspectives when using traditional tools vs. LLM-based tools to acquire data analytics skills. To explore this, we conducted a case study with a cohort of 59 participants among students and professionals without computational thinking skills. These participants developed a data analytics project in the context of a Data Analytics short session. Our case study focused on examining the participants' performance using traditional programming tools, ChatGPT, and LIDA with GPT as an advanced generative AI tool.ResultsThe results shown the transformative potential of approaches based on integrating advanced generative AI tools like GPT with specialized frameworks such as LIDA. The higher levels of participant preference indicate the superiority of these approaches over traditional development methods. Additionally, our findings suggest that the learning curves for the different approaches vary significantly. Since learners encountered technical difficulties in developing the project and interpreting the results. Our findings suggest that the integration of LIDA with GPT can significantly enhance the learning of advanced skills, especially those related to data analytics. We aim to establish this study as a foundation for the methodical adoption of generative AI tools in educational settings, paving the way for more effective and comprehensive training in these critical areas.DiscussionIt is important to highlight that when using general-purpose generative AI tools such as ChatGPT, users must be aware of the data analytics process and take responsibility for filtering out potential errors or incompleteness in the requirements of a data analytics project. These deficiencies can be mitigated by using more advanced tools specialized in supporting data analytics tasks, such as LIDA with GPT. However, users still need advanced programming knowledge to properly configure this connection via API. There is a significant opportunity for generative AI tools to improve their performance, providing accurate, complete, and convincing results for data analytics projects, thereby increasing user confidence in adopting these technologies. We hope this work underscores the opportunities and needs for integrating advanced LLMs into educational practices, particularly in developing computational thinking skills.

This repository contains two datasets used in the study exploring the impact of Generative AI, specifically ChatGPT, on the public sector workforce in the United States. The datasets provide detailed information on the core tasks of public sector occupations and their estimated performance metrics, including potential for automation and augmentation by ChatGPT. These estimations are generated by OpenAI’s GPT-4 model (GPT-4-1106-preview) through OpenAI API.

BackgroundClinical data is instrumental to medical research, machine learning (ML) model development, and advancing surgical care, but access is often constrained by privacy regulations and missing data. Synthetic data offers a promising solution to preserve privacy while enabling broader data access. Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) provide an opportunity to generate synthetic data with reduced reliance on domain expertise, computational resources, and pre-training.ObjectiveThis study aims to assess the feasibility of generating realistic tabular clinical data with OpenAI’s GPT-4o using zero-shot prompting, and evaluate the fidelity of LLM-generated data by comparing its statistical properties to the Vital Signs DataBase (VitalDB), a real-world open-source perioperative dataset.MethodsIn Phase 1, GPT-4o was prompted to generate a dataset with qualitative descriptions of 13 clinical parameters. The resultant data was assessed for general errors, plausibility of outputs, and cross-verification of related parameters. In Phase 2, GPT-4o was prompted to generate a dataset using descriptive statistics of the VitalDB dataset. Fidelity was assessed using two-sample t-tests, two-sample proportion tests, and 95% confidence interval (CI) overlap.ResultsIn Phase 1, GPT-4o generated a complete and structured dataset comprising 6,166 case files. The dataset was plausible in range and correctly calculated body mass index for all case files based on respective heights and weights. Statistical comparison between the LLM-generated datasets and VitalDB revealed that Phase 2 data achieved significant fidelity. Phase 2 data demonstrated statistical similarity in 12/13 (92.31%) parameters, whereby no statistically significant differences were observed in 6/6 (100.0%) categorical/binary and 6/7 (85.71%) continuous parameters. Overlap of 95% CIs were observed in 6/7 (85.71%) continuous parameters.ConclusionZero-shot prompting with GPT-4o can generate realistic tabular synthetic datasets, which can replicate key statistical properties of real-world perioperative data. This study highlights the potential of LLMs as a novel and accessible modality for synthetic data generation, which may address critical barriers in clinical data access and eliminate the need for technical expertise, extensive computational resources, and pre-training. Further research is warranted to enhance fidelity and investigate the use of LLMs to amplify and augment datasets, preserve multivariate relationships, and train robust ML models.

This dataset shows how men and women in the U.S. reported using ChatGPT in a 2025 survey, including whether they followed its advice or chose not to use it.

This project investigated teacher attitudes towards Generative Artificial Intelligence Tools (GAITs). In excess of three hundred teachers were surveyed across a broad variety of teaching levels, demographic areas, experience levels, and disciplinary areas, to better understand how they believe teaching and assessment should change as a result of GAITs such as ChatGPT.Teachers were invited to complete an online survey relating to their perceptions of the open Artificial Intelligence (AI) tool ChatGPT, and how it will influence what they teach and how they assess. The purpose of the study is to provide teachers, policymakers, and society at large with an understanding of the potential impact of tools such as ChatGPT on Education.This dataset contains public data files used for the ChatGPT survey (XLSX) and the survey containing variable selection codes (DOCX). See the second sheet of the XLSX file for variable descriptions.

This dataset presents ChatGPT usage patterns across different age groups, showing the percentage of users who have followed its advice, used it without following advice, or have never used it, based on a 2025 U.S. survey.

Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) models such as OpenAI’s ChatGPT have the potential to revolutionize Statistical Process Control (SPC) practice, learning, and research. However, these tools are in the early stages of development and can be easily misused or misunderstood. In this paper, we give an overview of the development of Generative AI. Specifically, we explore ChatGPT’s ability to provide code, explain basic concepts, and create knowledge related to SPC practice, learning, and research. By investigating responses to structured prompts, we highlight the benefits and limitations of the results. Our study indicates that the current version of ChatGPT performs well for structured tasks, such as translating code from one language to another and explaining well-known concepts but struggles with more nuanced tasks, such as explaining less widely known terms and creating code from scratch. We find that using new AI tools may help practitioners, educators, and researchers to be more efficient and productive. However, in their current stages of development, some results are misleading and wrong. Overall, the use of generative AI models in SPC must be properly validated and used in conjunction with other methods to ensure accurate results.

AI Tool Usage by Indian College Students 2025

This unique dataset, collected via a May 2025 survey, captures how 496 Indian college students use AI tools (e.g., ChatGPT, Gemini, Copilot) in academics. It includes 16 attributes like AI tool usage, trust, impact on grades, and internet access, ideal for education analytics and machine learning.

Columns

• Student_Name: Anonymized student name.
• College_Name: College attended.
• Stream: Academic discipline (e.g., Engineering, Arts).
• Year_of_Study: Year of study (1–4).
• AI_Tools_Used: Tools used (e.g., ChatGPT, Gemini).
• Daily_Usage_Hours: Hours spent daily on AI tools.
• Use_Cases: Purposes (e.g., Assignments, Exam Prep).
• Trust_in_AI_Tools: Trust level (1–5).
• Impact_on_Grades: Grade impact (-3 to +3).
• Do_Professors_Allow_Use: Professor approval (Yes/No).
• Preferred_AI_Tool: Preferred tool.
• Awareness_Level: AI awareness (1–10).
• Willing_to_Pay_for_Access: Willingness to pay (Yes/No).
• State: Indian state.
• Device_Used: Device (e.g., Laptop, Mobile).
• Internet_Access: Access quality (Poor/Medium/High).

Use Cases

• Predict academic performance using AI tool usage.
• Analyze trust in AI across streams or regions.
• Cluster students by usage patterns.
• Study digital divide via Internet_Access.

Source: Collected via Google Forms survey in May 2025, ensuring diverse representation across India. Note: First dataset of its kind on Kaggle!

This dataset shows the types of advice users sought from ChatGPT based on a 2025 U.S. survey, including education, financial, medical, and legal topics.

This dataset presents ChatGPT usage patterns across U.S. Census regions, based on a 2025 nationwide survey. It tracks how often users followed, partially used, or never used ChatGPT by state region.

This dataset contains the 30 questions that were posed to the chatbots (i) ChatGPT-3.5; (ii) ChatGPT-4; and (iii) Google Bard, in May 2023 for the study “Chatbots put to the test in math and logic problems: A preliminary comparison and assessment of ChatGPT-3.5, ChatGPT-4, and Google Bard”. These 30 questions describe mathematics and logic problems that have a unique correct answer. The questions are fully described with plain text only, without the need for any images or special formatting. The questions are divided into two sets of 15 questions each (Set A and Set B). The questions of Set A are 15 “Original” problems that cannot be found online, at least in their exact wording, while Set B contains 15 “Published” problems that one can find online by searching on the internet, usually with their solution. Each question is posed three times to each chatbot. This dataset contains the following: (i) The full set of the 30 questions, A01-A15 and B01-B15; (ii) the correct answer for each one of them; (iii) an explanation of the solution, for the problems where such an explanation is needed, (iv) the 30 (questions) × 3 (chatbots) × 3 (answers) = 270 detailed answers of the chatbots. For the published problems of Set B, we also provide a reference to the source where each problem was taken from.

The researcher tests the QA capability of ChatGPT in the medical field from the following aspects:1. Test their reserve capacity for medical knowledge2. Check their ability to read literature and understand medical literature3. Test their ability of auxiliary diagnosis after reading case data4. Test its error correction ability for case data5. Test its ability to standardize medical terms6. Test their evaluation ability to experts7. Check their ability to evaluate medical institutionsThe conclusion is:ChatGPT has great potential in the application of medical and health care, and may directly replace human beings or even professionals at a certain level in some fields;The researcher preliminarily believe that ChatGPT has basic medical knowledge and the ability of multiple rounds of dialogue, and its ability to understand Chinese is not weak;ChatGPT has the ability to read, understand and correct cases;ChatGPT has the ability of information extraction and terminology standardization, and is quite excellent;ChatGPT has the reasoning ability of medical knowledge;ChatGPT has the ability of continuous learning. After continuous training, its level has improved significantly;ChatGPT does not have the academic evaluation ability of Chinese medical talents, and the results are not ideal;ChatGPT does not have the academic evaluation ability of Chinese medical institutions, and the results are not ideal;ChatGPT is an epoch-making product, which can become a useful assistant for medical diagnosis and treatment, knowledge service, literature reading, review and paper writing.

The dataset comprises responses generated by ChatGPT using three different models (GPT-3.5, GPT-4o, and o1preview) evaluated for their effectiveness as an automated tutor in economics education at universities. The dataset focuses on two key use cases:

1. Explanations of 56 Basic Economic Concepts

2. Answers and Explanations to 25 Multiple-Choice Questions

The concepts and questions were sourced from CORE Econ’s The Economy 1.0 textbook. The selected content includes foundational ideas like "Opportunity Costs" and "Aggregate Demand," as well as more advanced topics such as "Asymmetric Information" and "Economic Rent."

Responses were generated using standardized prompts that simulate student interactions with ChatGPT. Each response was evaluated using a detailed marking grid that included both problem-specific and response-specific indicators—such as accuracy, scope, error types. A moderation process was applied to ensure reliability, with disagreements resolved through discussion.

The final dataset consolidates all model outputs, and their evaluations. It is suitable for analyzing the pedagogical potential and limitations of large language models in educational contexts. Further, all scripts used to evaluate the responses and perform the statistical analysis are included.

For more detail see the paper: Brose, Natalie, Christian Spielmann, and Christian Tode. ChatGPT as Economics Tutor: Capabilities and Limitations. School of Economics, University of Bristol, UK, 2025.

The data set records the perceptions of Bangladeshi university students on the influence that AI tools, especially ChatGPT, have on their academic practices, learning experiences, and problem-solving abilities. The varying role of AI in education, which covers common usage statistics, what AI does to our creative abilities, its impact on our learning, and whether it could invade our privacy. This dataset reveals perspective on how AI tools are changing education in the country and offering valuable information for researchers, educators, policymakers, to understand trends, challenges, and opportunities in the adoption of AI in the academic contex.

Methodology Data Collection Method: Online survey using google from Participants: A total of 3,512 students from various Bangladeshi universities participated. Survey Questions:The survey included questions on demographic information, frequency of AI tool usage, perceived benefits, concerns regarding privacy, and impacts on creativity and learning.

Sampling Technique: Random sampling of university students Data Collection Period: June 2024 to December 2024

Privacy Compliance This dataset has been anonymized to remove any personally identifiable information (PII). It adheres to relevant privacy regulations to ensure the confidentiality of participants.

For further inquiries, please contact: Name: Md Jhirul Islam, Daffodil International University Email: jhirul15-4063@diu.edu.bd Phone: 01316317573

This dataset summarizes how ChatGPT users rated the outcomes of the advice they received, including whether it was helpful, harmful, neutral, or uncertain, based on a 2025 U.S. survey.

This dataset was collected for research purposes and contains numerical data representing consumers' attitudes toward AI usage. The data was gathered through a survey conducted from May 22 to June 12, 2024. The dataset covers responses from participants in South Korea, China, Vietnam, and Japan. Key variables include consumer perceptions, adoption patterns, and demographic information to support analysis on regional differences in AI acceptance.

The data is scrapped using the Youtube API.

Index

videoId: A unique video ID of the Youtube Video. publishedAt: Date of upload of the video. channelID: A unique channel ID of the Youtube Channel. title: The title of the youtube video. channelTitle: The name of the channel. channelType: The Youtube Category ID of the Channel Type.

The dataset contains the results of developing alternative text for images using chatbots based on large language models. The study was carried out in April-June 2024. Microsoft Copilot, Google Gemini, and YandexGPT chatbots were used to generate 108 text descriptions for 12 images. Descriptions were generated by chatbots using keywords specified by a person. The experts then rated the resulting descriptions on a Likert scale (from 1 to 5). The data set is presented in a Microsoft Excel table on the “Data” sheet with the following fields: record number; image number; chatbot; image type (photo, logo); request date; list of keywords; number of keywords; length of keywords; time of compilation of keywords; generated descriptions; required length of descriptions; actual length of descriptions; description generation time; usefulness; reliability; completeness; accuracy; literacy. The “Images” sheet contains links to the original images. Alternative descriptions are presented in English.