Analysis of ChatGPT-5's scientific explanation ability in solving direct current circuit problems

Authors

  • Depa Zulpianti Universitas Tanjungpura
  • Judyanto Sirait Universitas Tanjungpura
  • Lanang Maulana Aminullah Universitas Tanjungpura

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31571/saintek.v15i1.9987

Keywords:

Scientific explanation ability, ChatGPT, Direct current circuit

Abstract

This study examined GPT-5's ability to construct scientific explanations when solving direct-current (DC) circuit problems. The analysis focused on whether the model could provide correct claims, relevant evidence, and logically connected reasoning grounded in physics concepts. A qualitative descriptive design was employed, with GPT-5 accessed through ChatGPT Plus as the unit of analysis. The model responded to six image-based multiple-choice items adapted from a basic DC-circuit assessment. The items addressed electric current, potential difference, and electric power as represented by bulb brightness in series and parallel circuits. To standardize the elicited responses, each item was presented in a new conversation together with the same structured prompt requiring a claim, evidence, and reasoning. The responses were evaluated using an analytic rubric with a maximum score of five per item. GPT-5 obtained 30 out of 30 points, corresponding to 100% across the six items. Its responses consistently selected the correct option, applied appropriate equations and circuit principles, and connected the evidence to the claim through coherent reasoning. These findings indicate that, under the specific prompting conditions and limited item set used in this study, GPT-5 demonstrated strong scientific explanation performance in basic DC-circuit contexts. Nevertheless, the findings should not be generalized to other physics topics, prompt formats, or AI systems without further investigation.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Depa Zulpianti, Universitas Tanjungpura

Physics Education Study Program

Judyanto Sirait, Universitas Tanjungpura

Physics Education Study Program

Lanang Maulana Aminullah, Universitas Tanjungpura

Physics Education Study Program

References

Aldazharova, S., Issayeva, G., Maxutov, S., & Balta, N. (2024). Assessing AI's problem solving in physics: Analyzing reasoning, false positives and negatives through the Force Concept Inventory. Contemporary Educational Technology, 16(4), 1–16.

Almasri, F. (2024). Exploring the impact of artificial intelligence in teaching and learning of science: A systematic review of empirical. Research in Science Education, 54, 977–997.

Azizah, M. A., & Mansyur, J. (2024). Perbandingan kapabilitas respons ChatGPT dan Gemini terhadap pernyataan konseptual tentang optik. Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika Tadulako Online, 12(1), 15–25.

Buabeng, I. (2018). Physics classroom interactions: Teaching strategies and practices. Journal of Research in Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 1(3), 311–328.

Chellappa, Vigneshkumar, & Luximon, Y. (2024). Computers and education: Artificial intelligence understanding the perception of design students towards ChatGPT. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 7, 1–8.

Chen, L., Chen, P., & Lin, Z. (2020). Artificial intelligence in education: A review. IEEE Access, 8, 75264–75278.

Clark, T. M. (2023). Investigating the use of an artificial intelligence chatbot with general chemistry exam question. Journal of Chemical Education, 100, 1905–1916.

Cooper, G. (2023). Examining science education in ChatGPT: An exploratory study of generative artificial intelligence. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 32(3), 444–452.

Costa, S. L. R., & Broietti, F. C. D. (2021). Scientific practices in science education publications: An analysis of research contexts. Science Education International, 32(4), 282–291.

Demirci, N. (2025). How successful are artificial intelligence chatbots on higher education entrance physics exams in Turkey. Journal of Educational Technology, 24(2), 120–156.

Giancoli, D. C. (2014). Physics: Principles with applications (7th ed.). Pearson Education.

Halliday, D., Resnick, R., & Walker, J. (2014). Fundamentals of physics (10th ed.). Wiley.

Hwang, G. J., Chang, C. Y., & Chen, P. Y. (2023). Integrating ChatGPT into STEM education: Opportunities and challenges. Computers & Education: Artificial Intelligence, 5, 100–153.

Kieser, F., Wulff, P., Kuhn, J., & Kuchemann, S. (2023). Educational data augmentation in physics education research using ChatGPT. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 19(2), 1–13.

Kurnianingrum, A. M. (2021). Analisis kemampuan memberikan penjelasan ilmiah (scientific explanation) tentang peristiwa pemantulan dan pembiasan cahaya pada siswa SMA Negeri Pakusari (Skripsi). Digital Repository Universitas Jember.

Lange, K. (2011). Scientific explanations: Peer feedback or teacher feedback (Tesis). Arizona State University.

Lopez, V., & Junior, M. F. R. (2024). Challenging ChatGPT with different types of physics education questions. The Physics Teacher, 62, 290–294.

Maulana, M. S., Widianto, S. R., Safitri, S. D. A., & Maulana, R. (2023). Pelatihan ChatGPT sebagai alat pembelajaran berbasis artificial intelligence di kelas. Jurnal Penelitian dan Pengabdian Masyarakat Jotika, 3(1), 16–19.

Misnawati. (2023). ChatGPT: Keuntungan, risiko, dan penggunaan bijak dalam era kecerdasan buatan. Prosiding Seminar Nasional Pendidikan Bahasa Sastra Seni dan Budaya, 2(1), 54–67.

National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K–12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. National Academies Press.

Polverini, G., & Gregorcic, B. (2024). Performance of ChatGPT on the test of understanding graphs in kinematics. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 20(1), 1–16.

Rofiqoh, I., & Zulhawati. (2020). Metode penelitian kualitatif, kuantitatif dan campuran. Pustaka Pelajar.

Sandoval, W. A., & Reiser, B. J. (2004). Explanation driven inquiry: Integrating conceptual and epistemic scaffolds for scientific inquiry. Science Education, 88(3), 345–372.

Tipler, P. A., & Mosca, G. (2008). Physics for scientists and engineers (6th ed.). W. H. Freeman and Company.

Valova, I., Mladenova, T., & Kanev, G. (2024). Students' perception of ChatGPT usage in education. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 15(1), 466–473.

Yilmaz, H., Maxutov, S., Baitekov, A., & Balta, N. (2023). Student's perception of ChatGPT: A technology acceptance model study. International Educational Review, 1(1), 57–83.

Downloads

Published

2026-06-30

How to Cite

Zulpianti, D., Sirait, J., & Aminullah, L. M. (2026). Analysis of ChatGPT-5’s scientific explanation ability in solving direct current circuit problems. Jurnal Pendidikan Informatika Dan Sains, 15(1), 178–188. https://doi.org/10.31571/saintek.v15i1.9987