Is Google Gemini better than ChatGPT at evaluating research quality?

27Citations
Citations of this article
20Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Google Gemini 1.5 Flash scores were compared with ChatGPT 4o-mini on evaluations of (a) 51 of the author's journal articles and (b) up to 200 articles in each of 34 field-based Units of Assessment (UoAs) from the UK Research Excellence Framework (REF) 2021. From (a), the results suggest that Gemini 1.5 Flash, unlike ChatGPT 4o-mini, may work better when fed with a PDF or article full text, rather than just the title and abstract. From (b), Gemini 1.5 Flash seems to be marginally less able to predict an article's research quality (using a departmental quality proxy indicator) than ChatGPT 4o-mini, although the differences are small, and both have similar disciplinary variations in this ability. Averaging multiple runs of Gemini 1.5 Flash improves the scores.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Thelwall, M. (2025). Is Google Gemini better than ChatGPT at evaluating research quality? Journal of Data and Information Science, 10(2), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.2478/jdis-2025-0014

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free