-
Evaluating Gemini in an arena for learning
Authors:
LearnLM Team,
Abhinit Modi,
Aditya Srikanth Veerubhotla,
Aliya Rysbek,
Andrea Huber,
Ankit Anand,
Avishkar Bhoopchand,
Brett Wiltshire,
Daniel Gillick,
Daniel Kasenberg,
Eleni Sgouritsa,
Gal Elidan,
Hengrui Liu,
Holger Winnemoeller,
Irina Jurenka,
James Cohan,
Jennifer She,
Julia Wilkowski,
Kaiz Alarakyia,
Kevin R. McKee,
Komal Singh,
Lisa Wang,
Markus Kunesch,
Miruna Pîslar,
Niv Efron
, et al. (12 additional authors not shown)
Abstract:
Artificial intelligence (AI) is poised to transform education, but the research community lacks a robust, general benchmark to evaluate AI models for learning. To assess state-of-the-art support for educational use cases, we ran an "arena for learning" where educators and pedagogy experts conduct blind, head-to-head, multi-turn comparisons of leading AI models. In particular, $N = 189$ educators d…
▽ More
Artificial intelligence (AI) is poised to transform education, but the research community lacks a robust, general benchmark to evaluate AI models for learning. To assess state-of-the-art support for educational use cases, we ran an "arena for learning" where educators and pedagogy experts conduct blind, head-to-head, multi-turn comparisons of leading AI models. In particular, $N = 189$ educators drew from their experience to role-play realistic learning use cases, interacting with two models sequentially, after which $N = 206$ experts judged which model better supported the user's learning goals. The arena evaluated a slate of state-of-the-art models: Gemini 2.5 Pro, Claude 3.7 Sonnet, GPT-4o, and OpenAI o3. Excluding ties, experts preferred Gemini 2.5 Pro in 73.2% of these match-ups -- ranking it first overall in the arena. Gemini 2.5 Pro also demonstrated markedly higher performance across key principles of good pedagogy. Altogether, these results position Gemini 2.5 Pro as a leading model for learning.
△ Less
Submitted 30 May, 2025;
originally announced May 2025.
-
LearnLM: Improving Gemini for Learning
Authors:
LearnLM Team,
Abhinit Modi,
Aditya Srikanth Veerubhotla,
Aliya Rysbek,
Andrea Huber,
Brett Wiltshire,
Brian Veprek,
Daniel Gillick,
Daniel Kasenberg,
Derek Ahmed,
Irina Jurenka,
James Cohan,
Jennifer She,
Julia Wilkowski,
Kaiz Alarakyia,
Kevin R. McKee,
Lisa Wang,
Markus Kunesch,
Mike Schaekermann,
Miruna Pîslar,
Nikhil Joshi,
Parsa Mahmoudieh,
Paul Jhun,
Sara Wiltberger,
Shakir Mohamed
, et al. (21 additional authors not shown)
Abstract:
Today's generative AI systems are tuned to present information by default rather than engage users in service of learning as a human tutor would. To address the wide range of potential education use cases for these systems, we reframe the challenge of injecting pedagogical behavior as one of \textit{pedagogical instruction following}, where training and evaluation examples include system-level ins…
▽ More
Today's generative AI systems are tuned to present information by default rather than engage users in service of learning as a human tutor would. To address the wide range of potential education use cases for these systems, we reframe the challenge of injecting pedagogical behavior as one of \textit{pedagogical instruction following}, where training and evaluation examples include system-level instructions describing the specific pedagogy attributes present or desired in subsequent model turns. This framing avoids committing our models to any particular definition of pedagogy, and instead allows teachers or developers to specify desired model behavior. It also clears a path to improving Gemini models for learning -- by enabling the addition of our pedagogical data to post-training mixtures -- alongside their rapidly expanding set of capabilities. Both represent important changes from our initial tech report. We show how training with pedagogical instruction following produces a LearnLM model (available on Google AI Studio) that is preferred substantially by expert raters across a diverse set of learning scenarios, with average preference strengths of 31\% over GPT-4o, 11\% over Claude 3.5, and 13\% over the Gemini 1.5 Pro model LearnLM was based on.
△ Less
Submitted 25 December, 2024; v1 submitted 20 December, 2024;
originally announced December 2024.
-
Towards Responsible Development of Generative AI for Education: An Evaluation-Driven Approach
Authors:
Irina Jurenka,
Markus Kunesch,
Kevin R. McKee,
Daniel Gillick,
Shaojian Zhu,
Sara Wiltberger,
Shubham Milind Phal,
Katherine Hermann,
Daniel Kasenberg,
Avishkar Bhoopchand,
Ankit Anand,
Miruna Pîslar,
Stephanie Chan,
Lisa Wang,
Jennifer She,
Parsa Mahmoudieh,
Aliya Rysbek,
Wei-Jen Ko,
Andrea Huber,
Brett Wiltshire,
Gal Elidan,
Roni Rabin,
Jasmin Rubinovitz,
Amit Pitaru,
Mac McAllister
, et al. (49 additional authors not shown)
Abstract:
A major challenge facing the world is the provision of equitable and universal access to quality education. Recent advances in generative AI (gen AI) have created excitement about the potential of new technologies to offer a personal tutor for every learner and a teaching assistant for every teacher. The full extent of this dream, however, has not yet materialised. We argue that this is primarily…
▽ More
A major challenge facing the world is the provision of equitable and universal access to quality education. Recent advances in generative AI (gen AI) have created excitement about the potential of new technologies to offer a personal tutor for every learner and a teaching assistant for every teacher. The full extent of this dream, however, has not yet materialised. We argue that this is primarily due to the difficulties with verbalising pedagogical intuitions into gen AI prompts and the lack of good evaluation practices, reinforced by the challenges in defining excellent pedagogy. Here we present our work collaborating with learners and educators to translate high level principles from learning science into a pragmatic set of seven diverse educational benchmarks, spanning quantitative, qualitative, automatic and human evaluations; and to develop a new set of fine-tuning datasets to improve the pedagogical capabilities of Gemini, introducing LearnLM-Tutor. Our evaluations show that LearnLM-Tutor is consistently preferred over a prompt tuned Gemini by educators and learners on a number of pedagogical dimensions. We hope that this work can serve as a first step towards developing a comprehensive educational evaluation framework, and that this can enable rapid progress within the AI and EdTech communities towards maximising the positive impact of gen AI in education.
△ Less
Submitted 19 July, 2024; v1 submitted 21 May, 2024;
originally announced July 2024.
-
ETA Prediction with Graph Neural Networks in Google Maps
Authors:
Austin Derrow-Pinion,
Jennifer She,
David Wong,
Oliver Lange,
Todd Hester,
Luis Perez,
Marc Nunkesser,
Seongjae Lee,
Xueying Guo,
Brett Wiltshire,
Peter W. Battaglia,
Vishal Gupta,
Ang Li,
Zhongwen Xu,
Alvaro Sanchez-Gonzalez,
Yujia Li,
Petar Veličković
Abstract:
Travel-time prediction constitutes a task of high importance in transportation networks, with web mapping services like Google Maps regularly serving vast quantities of travel time queries from users and enterprises alike. Further, such a task requires accounting for complex spatiotemporal interactions (modelling both the topological properties of the road network and anticipating events -- such a…
▽ More
Travel-time prediction constitutes a task of high importance in transportation networks, with web mapping services like Google Maps regularly serving vast quantities of travel time queries from users and enterprises alike. Further, such a task requires accounting for complex spatiotemporal interactions (modelling both the topological properties of the road network and anticipating events -- such as rush hours -- that may occur in the future). Hence, it is an ideal target for graph representation learning at scale. Here we present a graph neural network estimator for estimated time of arrival (ETA) which we have deployed in production at Google Maps. While our main architecture consists of standard GNN building blocks, we further detail the usage of training schedule methods such as MetaGradients in order to make our model robust and production-ready. We also provide prescriptive studies: ablating on various architectural decisions and training regimes, and qualitative analyses on real-world situations where our model provides a competitive edge. Our GNN proved powerful when deployed, significantly reducing negative ETA outcomes in several regions compared to the previous production baseline (40+% in cities like Sydney).
△ Less
Submitted 25 August, 2021;
originally announced August 2021.