144 reads

Gemini - A Family of Highly Capable Multimodal Models: Appendix

by Writings, Papers and Blogs on Text ModelsDecember 24th, 2023

Too Long; Didn't Read

This report introduces a new family of multimodal models, Gemini, that exhibit remarkable capabilities across image, audio, video, and text understanding. The Gemini family consists of Ultra, Pro, and Nano sizes, suitable for applications ranging from complex reasoning tasks to on-device memory-constrained use-cases. Evaluation on a broad range of benchmarks shows that our most-capable Gemini Ultra model advances the state of the art in 30 of 32 of these benchmarks — notably being the first model to achieve human-expert performance on the well-studied exam benchmark MMLU, and improving the state of the art in every one of the 20 multimodal benchmarks we examined. We believe that the new capabilities of Gemini models in cross-modal reasoning and language understanding will enable a wide variety of use cases and we discuss our approach toward deploying them responsibly to users.

Company Mentioned

featured image - Gemini - A Family of Highly Capable Multimodal Models: Appendix

This paper is available on arxiv under CC 4.0 license.

Authors: Gemini Team, Google.

Table of Links

Abstract and Introduction

Model Architecture

Training Infrastructure

Training Dataset

Evaluation

Responsible Deployment

Discussion and Conclusion, References

Contributions and Acknowledgments

Appendix

9. Appendix

9.1. Chain-of-Thought Comparisons on MMLU benchmark

We contrast several chain-of-thought approaches on MMLU and discuss their results in this section. We proposed a new approach where model produces k chain-of-thought samples, selects the majority vote if the model is confident above a threshold, and otherwise defers to the greedy sample choice. The thresholds are optimized for each model based on their validation split performance. The proposed approach is referred to as uncertainty-routed chain-of-thought. The intuition behind this approach is that chain-of-thought samples might degrade performance compared to the maximum-likelihood decision when the model is demonstrably inconsistent. We compare the gains from the proposed approach on both Gemini Ultra and GPT-4 in Figure 7. We find that Gemini Ultra benefits more from this approach compared to using only chain-of-thought samples. GPT-4’s performance improves from 84.2% with greedy sampling to 87.3% with uncertainty-routed chain-of-thought approach with 32 samples, but it already achieves these gains from using 32 chain-of-thought samples. In contrast, Gemini Ultra improves its performance significantly from 84.0% with greedy sampling to 90.0% with uncertainty-routed chain-of-thought approach with 32 samples while it marginally improves to 85.0% with the use of 32 chain-of-thought samples only.

9.2. Capabilities and Benchmarking Tasks

We use more than 50 benchmarks as a holistic harness to evaluate the Gemini models across text, image, audio and video. We provide a detailed list of benchmarking tasks for six different capabilities in text understanding and generation: factuality, long context, math/science, reasoning, summarization, and multilinguality. We also enumerate the benchmarks used for image understanding, video understanding, and audio understanding tasks.

• Factuality: We use 5 benchmarks: BoolQ (Clark et al., 2019), NaturalQuestions-Closed (Kwiatkowski et al., 2019), NaturalQuestions-Retrieved (Kwiatkowski et al., 2019), RealtimeQA (Kasai et al., 2022), TydiQA-noContext and TydiQA-goldP (Clark et al., 2020).

• Long Context: We use 6 benchmarks: NarrativeQA (Kočiský et al., 2018), Scrolls-Qasper, Scrolls-Quality (Shaham et al., 2022), XLsum (En), XLSum (non-English languages) (Hasan et al., 2021), and one other internal benchmark.

• Math/Science: We use 8 benchmarks: GSM8k (with CoT) (Cobbe et al., 2021), Hendryck’s MATH pass@1 (Hendrycks et al., 2021b), MMLU (Hendrycks et al., 2021a), Math-StackExchange, Math-AMC 2022-2023 problems, and three other internal benchmarks.

• Reasoning: We use 7 benchmarks: BigBench Hard (with CoT) (Srivastava et al., 2022; Suzgun et al., 2022), CLRS (Veličković et al., 2022), Proof Writer (Tafjord et al., 2020), Reasoning-Fermi problems (Kalyan et al., 2021), Lambada (Paperno et al., 2016), HellaSwag (Zellers et al., 2019), DROP (Dua et al., 2019).

• Summarization: We use 5 benchmarks: XL Sum (English), XL Sum (non-English languages) (Hasan et al., 2021), WikiLingua (non-English languages), WikiLingua (English) (Ladhak et al., 2020), XSum (Narayan et al., 2018).

• Multilinguality: We use 10 benchmarks: XLSum (Non-English languages) (Hasan et al., 2021), WMT22 (Kocmi et al., 2022), WMT23 (Tom et al., 2023), FRMT (Riley et al., 2023), WikiLingua (Non-English languages) (Ladhak et al., 2020), TydiQA (no context), TydiQA (GoldP) (Clark et al., 2020), MGSM (Shi et al., 2023), translated MMLU (Hendrycks et al., 2021a), NTREX (Federmann et al., 2022), FLORES-200 (Team et al., 2022).

• Image and Video: We use 9 benchmarks for image understanding: MMMU (Yue et al., 2023), TextVQA (Singh et al., 2019), DocVQA (Mathew et al., 2021), ChartQA (Masry et al., 2022), InfographicVQA (Mathew et al., 2022), MathVista (Lu et al., 2023), AI2D (Kembhavi et al., 2016), VQAv2 (Goyal et al., 2017), XM3600 (Thapliyal et al., 2022) for multi-lingual image understanding, and 6 benchmarks for video understanding: VATEX (Wang et al., 2019) for captioning in two different languages, YouCook2 (Zhou et al., 2018), NextQA (Xiao et al., 2021), ActivityNet-QA (Yu et al., 2019), and Perception Test MCQA (Pătrăucean et al., 2023).

• Audio: We use 5 benchmarks including automatic speech recognition (ASR) tasks such as FLEURS (Conneau et al., 2023), VoxPopuli (Wang et al., 2021), Multi-lingual Librispeech (Pratap et al., 2020), and automatic speech translation task such as CoVoST 2 (Wang et al., 2020).

9.3. Qualitative Examples

This section shows sample qualitative examples from prompting the Gemini Ultra model. Some illustrative examples of multimodal reasoning for image understanding tasks over charts, natural images and memes are shown in Figures 8, 9, 11, 13, 14, and 15. Figure 10 shows an example of image generation capabilities of Gemini Ultra where the user generates an interleaved sequence of image and text to design a blog post. Beyond English, Figure 16 shows model’s capability to understand images in a multilingual setting. Gemini models also show strong performance on multimodal image understanding and reasoning in mathematics, as shown in Figures 12, 18 and 19. Figure 20 is an example of complex multimodal reasoning demonstrating how the model composes complex image understanding, code generation, and instruction following capabilities for a given user task. In Figure 17, we see another example of the model being able to generate working code and follow complex user instructions. Finally, Figure 21 shows an example of Gemini Ultra’s capability of understanding video by reasoning over temporally connected set of frames.