Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Gemini 3.1 Pro

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 951 posts

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#81

Post by maxall4 »

ripbozo wrote: post #22
sigmar wrote: post #6

blog post is up- https://blog.google/innovation-and-ai/models-and-research/ge... edit: biggest benchmark changes from 3 pro: arc-agi-2 score went from 31.1% -> 77.1% apex-agents score went from 18.4% -> 33.5%

Does the arc-agi-2 score more than doubling in a .1 release indicate benchmark-maxing? Though i dont know what arc-agi-2 actually tests

Theoretically, you can’t benchmaxx ARC-AGI, but I too am suspect of such a large improvement, especially since the improvement on other benchmarks is not of the same order.

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#82

Post by mixel »

Google seems to really pull ahead in this AI race. For me personally they offer the best deal and although the software is not quiet there compared to openai or anthropic (in regards to 1. web GUI, 2. agent-cli). I hope they can fix that in the future and I think once Gemini 4 or whatever launches we will see a huge leap again

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#83

Post by boplicity »

ripbozo wrote: post #22
sigmar wrote: post #6

blog post is up- https://blog.google/innovation-and-ai/models-and-research/ge... edit: biggest benchmark changes from 3 pro: arc-agi-2 score went from 31.1% -> 77.1% apex-agents score went from 18.4% -> 33.5%

Does the arc-agi-2 score more than doubling in a .1 release indicate benchmark-maxing? Though i dont know what arc-agi-2 actually tests

Benchmark maxing could be interpreted as benchmarks actually being a design framework? I'm sure there are pitfalls to this, but it's not necessarily bad either.

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#84

Post by epolanski »

quacky_batak wrote: post #54

I’m keen to know how and where are you using Gemini. Anthropic is clearly targeted to developers and OpenAI is general go to AI model. Who are the target demographic for Gemini models? ik that they are good and Flash is super impressive. but i’m curious

Various friends of mine work in non-technology companies (banking, industries, legal, Italy) and in pretty much all of them there's Gemini enterprise + NotebookLM.

In all of them the approach is: this is the solution, now find problems you can apply it to.

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#85

Post by nickandbro »

andy12_ wrote: post #65
nickandbro wrote: post #51

Does well on SVGs outside of "pelican riding on a bicycle" test. Like this prompt: "create a svg of a unicorn playing xbox" https://www.svgviewer.dev/s/NeKACuHj Still some tweaks to the final result, but I am guessing with the ARC-AGI benchmark jumping so much, the model's visual abilities are allowing it to do this well.

I'm thinking now that as models get better and better at generating SVGs, there could be a point where we can use them to just make arbitrary UIs and interactive media with raw SVGs in realtime (like flash games).

Or quite literally a game where SVG assets are generated on the fly using this model

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#86

Post by Robdel12 »

I really want to use google’s models but they have the classic Google product problem that we all like to complain about.

I am legit scared to login and use Gemini CLI because the last time I thought I was using my “free” account allowance via Google workspace. Ended up spending $10 before realizing it was API billing and the UI was so hard to figure out I gave up. I’m sure I can spend 20-40 more mins to sort this out, but ugh, I don’t want to.

With alllll that said.. is Gemini 3.1 more agentic now? That’s usually where it failed. Very smart and capable models, but hard to apply them? Just me?

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#87

Post by markab21 »

dxbednarczyk wrote: post #53

Every time I've used Gemini models for anything besides code or agentic work they lean so far into the RLHF induced bold lettering and bullet point list barf that everything they output reads as if the model was talking _at_ me and not _with_ me. In my Openclaw experiment(s) and in the Gemini web UI, I've specifically added instructions to avoid this type of behavior, but it only seemed to obey those rules when I rem…

You just articulated why I struggle to personally connect with Gemini. It feels so unrelatable and exhausting to read its output. I prefer to read Opus/Deepseek/GLM over Gemini, Qwen and the open source GPT models. Maybe it is RLHF that is creating my distaste from using it. (I pay for Gemini; I should be using it more... but the outputs just bug me and feel more work to get actionable insight.)

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#88

Post by spyckie2 »

makeavish wrote: post #45

Great model until it gets nerfed. I wish they had a higher paid tier to use non nerfed model.

I think there is a pattern it will always be nerfed the few weeks before launching a new model. Probably because they are throwing a bunch of compute at the new model.

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#89

Post by cmrdporcupine »

Doesn't show as available in gemini CLI for me. I have one of those "AI Pro" packages, but don't see it. Typical for Google, completely unclear how to actually use their stuff.

Re: Gemini 3.1 Pro

#90

Post by [deleted] »

jug wrote: post #68
quacky_batak wrote: post #54

I’m keen to know how and where are you using Gemini. Anthropic is clearly targeted to developers and OpenAI is general go to AI model. Who are the target demographic for Gemini models? ik that they are good and Flash is super impressive. but i’m curious

I personally use it as my general purpose and coding model. It's good enough for my coding tasks most of the time, has very good and rapid web search grounding that makes the Google index almost feel like part of its training set, and Google has a family sharing plan with individual quotas for Google AI Pro at $20/month for 5 users which also includes 2 TB in the cloud. Family sharing is a unique feature for Gemini 3…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN