* This blog post is a summary of this video.

Comparing AI Writing Assistants: An In-Depth Analysis

Table of Contents

Introduction to AI Writing Assistants

In this blog post, we will be reviewing and comparing some of the top AI writing assistants available today: ChatGPT, Claude by Anthropic, GPT-3 Playground by OpenAI, Google's BERT, Microsoft Bing's Creative Mode, and others. We will evaluate them across several criteria to determine which is the overall best AI writing assistant.

Specifically, we will judge them based on word count, SEO optimization score, readability grade level, and ability to pass plagiarism checks. By the end, you'll have a clear sense of the strengths and weaknesses of each tool.

What We'll Cover in This Evaluation

In the sections below, we will walk through testing each writing assistant using the same prompt, which asks them to write a 2000 word article on the topic of "can dogs eat bread" in Markdown formatting. We require them to include bolded keyword lists and tables, with a focus on 8th grade reading level. For each assistant, we will record metrics like:

  • Word count
  • SEO optimization score from Neurorighter
  • Readability grade level per Hemingway Editor
  • Plagiarism score from Originality Checker This structured approach will allow us to systematically compare the outputs.

Evaluation Criteria

We will judge the AI writing tools across four key criteria:

  • Word Count - the closer to 2000 words the better
  • SEO Score - higher is better optimization
  • Readability - target is 8th grade level
  • Plagiarism Check - ability to pass is better Additionally, we will consider how precisely the assistants followed instructions regarding formatting, lists, and tables. Let's dive in and see how each performs!

ChatGPT 3.5 and 4.0 Performance

First up is ChatGPT by Anthropic, one of the most popular AI assistants. We will test both version 3.5 and the newest 4.0 to compare capabilities.

ChatGPT 3.5 Results

Using the standard prompt outlined above, ChatGPT 3.5 produced a 687 word article with a SEO score of 59, readability of 8th grade level, but 0% originality. It did manage to include decent keyword lists and a table. So a pretty good showing from 3.5, but let's see if 4.0 advances capabilities further.

ChatGPT 4.0 Results

Moving to ChatGPT 4.0, the word count slightly dropped to 649 words. However, SEO score improved to 64 and readability hit 9th grade level. Still 0% originality though. So while output length declined, 4.0 does appear to be optimizing better for quality over quantity. We also observed more advanced handling of prompts and formatting structure.

OpenAI's GPT-3 Playground

The GPT-3 Playground allows fine tuned control over parameters compared to ChatGPT. We can customize temperature, frequency penalty, and more. Let's see if these levers produce better results.

Default Settings Performance

With playground settings at default, output word count was just 465 words - far below target. SEO score was slightly better at 64, but readability dropped to 5th grade level. Originality remained 0%. So some mixed metrics here compared to ChatGPT - better SEO but much simpler writing style and prose.

Tweaked Settings Performance

By adjusting the temperature down to 0.3 and adding frequency + presence penalties of 0.5, the playground results improved markedly. Word count rose to 617 words. SEO score reached 65. Readability hit more advanced 10th grade level. And remarkably, originality passed at 37%! This demonstrates how tuning the playground settings can really impact output quality. With the right configuration, it outperformed ChatGPT handily by passing plagiarism checks.

Google's BERT Writing Assistant

Google's Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT) is an NLP model known for understanding context. Let's examine how that translates for writing assistance.

BERT managed to produce a sizable entity and keyword list thanks to Google's NLP dataset. However, the actual article word count was just 432. SEO was a decent 59, but readability came in at 4th grade.

And BERT's originality remained 0%. So while BERT's language understanding is advanced, the writing capabilities and prose lag the other AI tools we've covered so far.

Microsoft Bing's Creative Mode

As a new offering, Bing has introduced a Creative Mode underpinned by GPT-3.5. We prompted it to write an article in Markdown formatting just like the other tools.

The word count was shortest so far at just 300 words. But SEO score was competitive at 62. Readability was comparable to others at 5th grade.

And like ChatGPT, Bing's originality score came back 0%.

So Bing's Creative Mode does allow basic article writing, but has room to mature when it comes to output length and originality.

Anthropic's Claude Writing Assistant

Last up is Anthropic's own Claude, the AI assistant meant to rival ChatGPT.

Claude produced the longest article by far, hitting 827 words where most others ranged 300-600. SEO score was also strong at 66, with 5th grade readability.

And impressively, Claude achieved 17% originality! The highest passing score we observed.

So Claude edged out ChatGPT and other rivals as having the overall best mix of length, formatting, SEO strength, readability, and originality. A very versatile AI writing tool.

Conclusion and Recommendations

We evaluated ChatGPT, Claude, GPT-3 Playground, BERT, Bing, and others across word count, SEO, readability, and plagiarism checks to determine the best AI writing assistant.

So which tool comes out on top for content creators and SEO professionals? Let's recap the key findings and crown a winner.

Summary of Findings

  • ChatGPT 3.5 and 4.0 offer solid writing capability all-around, with 4.0 optimized better for quality over quantity
  • GPT-3 Playground can outperform ChatGPT with the right parameter tuning, passing plagiarism checks
  • Google's BERT had strong language understanding but writing output was weaker
  • Bing Creative Mode shows promise but was lighter on content length and originality
  • Claude by Anthropic topped rankings for output length, SEO score, and originality rate

Best AI Writing Assistant

Based on these head-to-head tests, Anthropic's Claude emerges as the strongest AI writing assistant today. It produced the longest, best formatted, and most SEO friendly content while still maintaining decent readability and 17% originality to pass plagiarism checks. For those reasons, Claude stands out as most capable for long-form blogging and artices to make online writing more efficient.

FAQ

Q: Which AI writing tool generated the highest quality content?
A: Based on the evaluation criteria, Anthropic's Claude produced the longest and most optimized content while still maintaining strong readability scores.

Q: What criteria were used to evaluate the AI writing assistants?
A: The tools were evaluated based on content length, SEO optimization score, readability grade level, and ability to pass plagiarism checks.

Q: Which tool had the best balance of high quality and readable content?
A: Anthropic's Claude scored very highly across all evaluation metrics, producing quality content that was also highly readable and SEO friendly.

Q: Did any tools completely fail the test?
A: No tools completely failed, though some like Google's BERT and OpenAI's Playground had weaknesses in certain areas like content length and formatting.

Q: What was the biggest surprise finding?
A: Microsoft Bing's creative mode performance was surprisingly strong given its lower profile compared to tools like GPT-3.

Q: Which tool is best for SEO content generation?
A: Based on the scores, Anthropic's Claude is the leading choice if SEO optimization is the top priority.

Q: What changes could improve the weaker performing tools?
A: Tools like BERT and GPT-3 Playground could be improved by enhancing formatting, content length, and adherence to prompt instructions.

Q: Were there any unexpected winners or losers?
A: Anthropic's Claude exceeded expectations while OpenAI's acclaimed GPT-3 underperformed relative to its reputation.

Q: Which assistant is the best bang for buck?
A: Considering factors like price and quality, Microsoft Bing's creative mode delivers strong performance at no cost.

Q: What further testing could be beneficial?
A: Testing content against actual search engine rankings could provide additional real-world validation.

PreNext