Papers › An In-depth Look at Gemini's Language Abilities

An In-depth Look at Gemini's Language Abilities

18 Dec 2023arXiv:2312.11444archive 2025-07-28

Syeda Nahida Akter, Zichun Yu, Aashiq Muhamed, Tianyue Ou, Alex Bäuerle, Ángel Alexander Cabrera, Krish Dholakia, Chenyan Xiong, Graham Neubig

The recently released Google Gemini class of models are the first to comprehensively report results that rival the OpenAI GPT series across a wide variety of tasks. In this paper, we do an in-depth exploration of Gemini's language abilities, making two contributions. First, we provide a third-party, objective comparison of the abilities of the OpenAI GPT and Google Gemini models with reproducible code and fully transparent results. Second, we take a closer look at the results, identifying areas where one of the two model classes excels. We perform this analysis over 10 datasets testing a variety of language abilities, including reasoning, answering knowledge-based questions, solving math problems, translating between languages, generating code, and acting as instruction-following agents. From this analysis, we find that Gemini Pro achieves accuracy that is close but slightly inferior to the corresponding GPT 3.5 Turbo on all tasks that we benchmarked. We further provide explanations for some of this under-performance, including failures in mathematical reasoning with many digits, sensitivity to multiple-choice answer ordering, aggressive content filtering, and others. We also identify areas where Gemini demonstrates comparably high performance, including generation into non-English languages, and handling longer and more complex reasoning chains. Code and data for reproduction can be found at https://github.com/neulab/gemini-benchmark

PaperPDFCodeCode Syntology ran

In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.

For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2312.11444")

Code

Syntology Ran 11 of 12 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 1 has no recorded run. Of those that ran: 11 ran with no contract checked.

By repository: official repository: 12 samples from 1 repository, 11 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.

neulab/gemini-benchmark officialmentioned in papermentioned on GitHubpytorch report

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

12 samples harvested; 11 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 1 has no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

11ran
1unverified

Licence: 12 of the 12 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from neulab/gemini-benchmark. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

add_indent neulab/gemini-benchmark/benchmarking/Code/prompt.py official repository ran fingerprinted no licence file found · pointer only · fff28a1235bb78e3 · report
clean_prediction neulab/gemini-benchmark/benchmarking/Code/processor.py official repository ran fingerprinted no licence file found · pointer only · cd9b3073b198bcf2 · report
create_entry_point neulab/gemini-benchmark/benchmarking/Code/prompt.py official repository ran no licence file found · pointer only · c2df81b084b3c449 · report
get_prediction_dir neulab/gemini-benchmark/benchmarking/Code/utils.py official repository ran fingerprinted no licence file found · pointer only · ea91f5626d5fa702 · report
get_prediction_name neulab/gemini-benchmark/benchmarking/Code/utils.py official repository ran no licence file found · pointer only · 2cae86ab34075bc3 · report
get_test_path neulab/gemini-benchmark/benchmarking/Code/utils.py official repository ran fingerprinted no licence file found · pointer only · 4932749f4b820198 · report
remove_indent neulab/gemini-benchmark/benchmarking/Code/prompt.py official repository ran fingerprinted no licence file found · pointer only · f6d679fa0ea419ac · report
select_fewshot_examples neulab/gemini-benchmark/benchmarking/Code/run_code.py official repository ran no licence file found · pointer only · cb87547454883316 · report
test_answer_mmlu_ neulab/gemini-benchmark/benchmarking/MMLU/utils.py official repository ran fingerprinted no licence file found · pointer only · 6acf3db996d8c4f5 · report
test_answer_mmlu_claude neulab/gemini-benchmark/benchmarking/MMLU/utils.py official repository ran fingerprinted no licence file found · pointer only · db42ba0a29b6cff8 · report
test_answer_mmlu_claude_instant neulab/gemini-benchmark/benchmarking/MMLU/utils.py official repository ran fingerprinted no licence file found · pointer only · ff7e01003fa98d8a · report
get_response neulab/gemini-benchmark/benchmarking/Code/run_code.py official repository unverified no licence file found · pointer only · 78ca0bb4c28987ab · report

Tasks

Instruction FollowingMathMathematical ReasoningMultiple-choice

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Methods

AdamAttentionAttention DropoutBPECosine AnnealingDense ConnectionsDiscriminative Fine-TuningDropoutGPTLayer NormalizationLinear LayerLinear Warmup With Cosine AnnealingMulti-Head AttentionResidual ConnectionSoftmaxWeight Decay

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections