Results.Figure 6 shows the performance of GPT3 model and its instruction-tuned counterparts on this newly written instruction set (w. inter-rater agreement \(\kappa=0.57\) on the 4-class categorical scale, see Appendix B for details). As anticipated, the vanilla GPT3 LM is largely unable to respond to instructions, and all instruction-tuned models demonstrate comparatively higher performance. Nonetheless, GPT3SELF-INST (i.e., GPT3 model finetuned with Self-INstruct) outperforms those counterparts trained on T0 or SuperNI data by a large margin, demonstrating the value of the generated data despite the noise. Compared with InstructGPT001, GPT3SELF-INST is quite close in performance--if we count acceptable response with minor imperfections (Rating-B) as valid, GPT3SELF-INST is only 5% behind InstructGPT001. Lastly, our evaluation confirms the impressive instruction-following ability of InstructGPT002 and InstructGPT003. Although there are many factors behind this success, we conjecture that future work can largely benefit from improving the quality of our generated data by using human annotators or training a reward model to select better generations, similar to the algorithm used by Ouyang et al. (2022).