Gemini 介紹與實測 — 評分篇

Gemini 簡介

Gemini 是一個由 Google AI 開發的大型語言模型 (LLM)，可以生成文本、翻譯語言、編寫不同類型的創意內容，並以信息豐富的方式回答您的問題。Gemini 具有強大的語言理解能力、廣泛的知識儲備和創造性的思維能力，可用於自然語言處理、創意寫作、教育、客戶服務等領域。

Gemini 與 ChatGPT 的比較

Gemini 與 ChatGPT 都是目前最先進的大型語言模型之一。兩者在性能和功能上都非常接近，但也有各自的優勢和劣勢。

Gemini 的優勢在於：

• 擁有更強大的語言理解能力，可以理解更複雜的語言和語義。
• 擁有更廣泛的知識儲備，可以回答更多種類的問題。

ChatGPT 的優勢在於：

• 具有更強大的生成能力，可以生成更具創意和趣味性的內容。
• 具有更成熟的用戶界面，更容易使用。

總體而言，Gemini 和 ChatGPT 都各有千秋，具體選擇哪一個取決於您的具體需求。如果您需要一個語言理解能力強、知識儲備豐富的 LLM，那麼 Gemini 是更好的選擇。如果您需要一個生成能力強、用戶界面友好的 LLM，那麼 ChatGPT 是更好的選擇。

Gemini 的費用

Gemini 目前提供免費試用，您可以免費使用的 Gemini 或 Gemini API。

Google AI 正在考慮在未來對 Gemini 收費。具體的收費方案尚未確定，但可能會根據使用量或功能進行收費。

評分實測

Testing prompt

### Instruction:
  Based on rubric to give a score(0-3) to sentence. Start directly without any unnecessary words, Just like an API.

  ### Rubric:
  1. Clear Claim with Reasons: Claim is unclear/No clear reasons are given/Claim is clear, but the reasons are unclear, absent, or incomplete. Claim and reasons are clearly stated/Claim is clearly stated and the reasons are strong.
  2. Evidence: Central claim is not supported. No evidence provided. /Attempts to support the central claim and reasons with facts, but information is unclear, inaccurate, or lacks citations./Supports the central claim and reasons with facts. necessary details, and citations. /Supports the central claim and reasons with strong facts, thorough details, and accurate citations.
  3. Explanation: Contains little to no explanation or analysis of the information presented. /Attempts to explain and analyze the information, but the explanation is unclear or inaccurate. / Clearly explains and analyzes most of the information presented. / Clearly, concisely, and thoroughly explains and analyzes the information presented.
  4. Conclusion: Abrupt or absent ending. No concluding statement. / Ends with a concluding statement that does not clearly relate to the central claim./ Ends with a concluding statement about the central claim./ Ends with a strong or compelling concluding statement that clearly relates to the central claim.
  5. Formal Tone and Style: Informal language present throughout./Writing contains some informal elements (e.g., contractions)./Writing attempts to maintain a formal and objective tone. /Writing maintains a formal and objective tone throughout.
  6. Organization & Transitions: Little to no attempt at organization. /Attempts to organize ideas, but transitional language is needed. /Organizes ideas in a logical way. Transitional language used. /Strong organization and transitional language used skillfully throughout.
  7. Mechanics (Spelling & Grammar):Distracting mechanical errors throughout./Mechanical errors distract at times/A few errors present, but they do not distract./Mechanics reflect careful editing.

  ### Example:
  Sentence: the US should support Taiwan for stability in the region and to uphold democratic principles. However, it's crucial to prioritize diplomatic solutions to avoid conflict. ;

  SCOPESCORE:
  1. Clear Claim with Reasons: No clear reasons are given -> 1
  2. Evidence: Central claim is not supported. No evidence provided -> 0
  3. Explanation: Attempts to explain and analyze the information, but the explanation is unclear or inaccurate -> 1
  4. Conclusion: Ends with a strong or compelling concluding statement that clearly relates to the central claim. -> 3
  5. Formal Tone and Style: Writing attempts to maintain a formal and objective tone. -> 2
  6. Organization & Transitions: Organizes ideas in a logical way. Transitional language used. -> 2
  7. Mechanics (Spelling & Grammar): Mechanics reflect careful editing -> 3

  SUMSCORE: 1+0+1+3+2+2+3 = 12

### Content 
  對於台灣的核電發展，我認為必須確保能源穩定供應，同時優先考慮安全和環境問題。台灣應繼續開發和投資先進技術，以提高核電廠的效率和永續性。
SCOPESCORE:

• Test Case: 相同內容下可不可以有一樣的分析結果『統一性』

• 結果: 並不穩定

• Test Case : 是否能正確針對內容進行理解和分析 『分辨性』
• 結論： 感覺只能在巨大差異下分辨

這邊的結果不是太滿意，這參考了一些文獻，後面我將temperature 從1到0，效果非常良好。

• Test Case: 相同內容下可不可以有一樣的分析結果『統一性』

• Test Case : 是否能正確針對內容進行理解和分析 『分辨性』