@evan but again, this is anthropocentric. You're defining language as language that is intelligible to humans and then saying that the tool designed by humans to output human language is better at human language than chimps! It's a silly game that plays into this very stratified view of what constitutes intelligence.
I certainly think that ranking LLMs over dolphins, who we have little understanding of their communication, seems very bizarre.
@evan additionally, why is language use a more defining characteristic of intelligence than tool use? Chimps, bonobos, dolphins, octopi, corvids etc all can use tools and solve complex tasks but aren't good at language (to our definition of language). Does this matter?