Resolves as positive if an AI asked to write poetry in the style of Keats/Byron/Shelley etc can, on its first attempt, write a poem of at least two stanzas which I personally can't distinguish from the real thing. I am a fan of these poets and I think I would be pretty good at distinguishing them from imitators, including worse Romantic poets. The poem will need to use rhyme and rhythm correctly.
This doesn't get brought up often, but poetry is actually one of the only areas where there has been a peer-reviewed Turing test. In their study, GPT-2 could already produce indistinguishable poetry as long as a human got to select the best GPT-2 output. I bet the same study would work for GPT-4 without the human in the loop. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106553
I'm not sure I trust SA to be able to judge if a poem is "indistinguishable" from a true work of Byron or Shelley. Not sure about asking a true Byron scholar either, and they would presumably be familiar with all existing work and could simply identify the AI product by exclusion. This question does not really work as a market.
I think 2 stanzas makes this much easier than if it was "write a book length epic in the style of Wordsworth or Byron that could plausibly be by them'.
@DavidMathers that's true, although "a poem of at least two stanzas" is still probably more difficult than "at least two stanzas of a poem".
seems significant that almost no humans can do this (though also most humans aren't really trying)
The state-of-the-art has gotten dramatically better at this over the past 6 months. In October 2022, it couldn't reliably do meter or rhyme, but today it can. The quality is still worse than "the real thing" still, but I'm betting that in five years it won't be.
