Gemini 3 Deep Think

Re:Gemini 3 Deep Think by energy123 on Friday February 13, 2026 @02:12AM (#46999836)

Suggestion: run the identical prompt N times (2 identical calls to Gemini 3.0 Pro + 2 identical calls to GPT 5.2 Thinking), then running some basic text post-processing to see where the 4 responses agree vs disagree. The disagreements (substrings that aren't identical matches) are where scrutiny is needed. But if all 4 agree on some substring it's almost certainly a correct transcription. Wouldn't be too hard to get codex to vibe code all this.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Gemini 3 Deep Think by matjet on Friday February 13, 2026 @06:22AM (#47001509)

Look what they need to mimic a fraction of [the power of having the logit probabilities exposed so you can actually see where the model is uncertain]

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Gemini 3 Deep Think by kfajdsl on Friday February 13, 2026 @05:37PM (#47008792)

All the LLM logprob outputs I've seen aren't very well calibrated, at least for transcription tasks - I'm guessing it's similar for OCR type tasks.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Gemini 3 Deep Think by energy123 on Saturday February 14, 2026 @05:11AM (#47013297)

"I already decided in my private reasoning trace to resolve this ambiguity by emitting the string '27' instead of '22' right here, thus '27' has 100% probability"

[ Parent | on HN ]