Monday, March 20, 2023 ChatGTP-4's attempt at parts 3 & 4 of the Pre-Exam 2023

We also let ChatGPT provide answers to parts 3 & 4 of the Pre-Exam.

Some practical difficulties were that only plain text could be entered, which means that in part 3, the figures couldn't be provided, and that the underlining when indicating amendments was not present.

If one would consider our answers (see seperate posts, which are not necessarily correct!!) as the intended solution and applied the Pre-Exam's marking scheme (all correct: 5 points, 1 wrong: 3 points, etc), ChatGTP achieved 16/50 points which is well below the required passing grade of 35 (normalized from 70 for the entire exam to 35 for parts 3 & 4) and rather a score associated with mere guessing.

Generally speaking, ChatGPT seems to be able to answer basic novelty and scope questions reasonably well but fails at more specific topics such as ranges. Also, ChatGPT appearantly disagrees with the EPO's relatively strict approach to Art. 123(2) and considers most of the amendments as supported. Perhaps this reveals ChatGTP's US-origin?

See below for ChatGPT's answers and short reasoning (red marked where ChatGPT's answer deviated from ours):

Question 11:

Statement	True/False	Reasoning
11.1	T	Claim I.4 is disclosed in the description at [05]
11.2	T	The third embodiment is described at [05] and [06], which correspond to claim I.1
11.3	T	The second embodiment is described at [04], which corresponds to claim I.1
11.4	F	Claim I.3 only covers the first embodiment with polypropylene fibers, but not all alternatives of the first embodiment

Question 12:

Statement	True/False	Reasoning
12.1	T	Claim I.4 is based on the description at [05]
12.2	T	Claim I.5 is based on the description at [05]
12.3	T	Claim I.6 is based on the description at [04]
12.4	T	Claim I.1 is based on the description at [03]

Question 13:

Statement	True/False	Reasoning
13.1	T	D1 does not disclose the specific weight requirements of claim I.7
13.2	T	D1 does not disclose the exact combination of sponge and fiber layers in claim I.1
13.3	T	D1 does not disclose the loops or upstanding ends of claim I.4
13.4	F	D1 does disclose the use of polypropylene fibers in [01]

Question 14:

Statement	True/False	Reasoning
14.1	T	The problem-solution approach in claim II.1 is to provide a more abrasive cleaning action, as described in [05]
14.2	T	The problem-solution approach in claim II.1 is to improve the cleaning action of a layer comprising fibers, as described in [05] and [06]
14.3	F	Claim I.2 does not address the release of water into the first layer; this is addressed in claim I.6 and described at [04]
14.4	T	D1 does not give a hint to the claimed ranges in claim III.1, and thus the claim involves an inventive step

Question 15:

Statement	True/False	Reasoning
15.1	T	The amendment is based on the description at [04]
15.2	T	The dependency on claim I.5 is supported by the description at [05] and [07]
15.3	T	The amendment is based on the description at [08]
15.4	T	The amendment is based on the description at [08]

 

Statement	True/False	Reasoning
16.1	T	Para. [06] in the description states this as a requirement for the releasing agent with modified siloxane.
16.2	F	Para. [08] in the description only describes it as preferred, not essential.
16.3	T	Para. [05] in the description states this as a requirement for the erasable ink composition.
16.4	F	Para. [06] in the description states it as a finding that improves erasing, not as essential.
17.1	F	Claim I.5 doesn't include essential features (a) and (b) from claim I.1.
17.2	T	Claim I.1bis is supported by para. [04] in the description.
17.3	T	Claim I.4 is clear and supported by the description in para. [05].
17.4	T	Claim I.8bis is supported by para. [09] in the description.
18.1	F	D2 discloses an erasable ink composition with a water-based solvent system and pigment (D2, [02]).
18.2	T	D1 discloses a solvent system based on an organic ester, not water (D1, [04]).
18.3	F	D2 discloses water in the solvent system (D2, [02]), overlapping with the range in claim I.3.
18.4	T	D2 does not disclose a polymeric binder comprising a polyvinyl butyral resin.
19.1	F	D2 discloses an erasable ink composition, not a pen containing it.
19.2	T	D2 does not discuss erasability in relation to drying time.
19.3	F	D1 does not explicitly mention that releasing agents are essential in all erasable ink compositions.
19.4	F	D1 does not discuss any disadvantages of water in the solvent system.
20.1	T	Claim II.1 includes all essential features and is supported by the description.
20.2	T	The new set of claims meets the requirements of Article 123(2) EPC.
20.3	T	The new set of claims meets the requirements of Article 84 EPC.
20.4	T	The new set of claims meets the requirements of Article 54 EPC.