Comparative Analysis Based on DeepSeek, ChatGPT, and Google Gemini: Features, Techniques, Performance, Future Prospects
Reviewed by Pith T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 kernel pith:BNYBSFE4record.jsonopen to challenge →
read the original abstract
Nowadays, DeepSeek, ChatGPT, and Google Gemini are the most trending and exciting Large Language Model (LLM) technologies for reasoning, multimodal capabilities, and general linguistic performance worldwide. DeepSeek employs a Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) approach, activating only the parameters most relevant to the task at hand, which makes it especially effective for domain-specific work. On the other hand, ChatGPT relies on a dense transformer model enhanced through reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF), and then Google Gemini actually uses a multimodal transformer architecture that integrates text, code, and images into a single framework. However, by using those technologies, people can be able to mine their desired text, code, images, etc, in a cost-effective and domain-specific inference. People may choose those techniques based on the best performance. In this regard, we offer a comparative study based on the DeepSeek, ChatGPT, and Gemini techniques in this research. Initially, we focus on their methods and materials, appropriately including the data selection criteria. Then, we present state-of-the-art features of DeepSeek, ChatGPT, and Gemini based on their applications. Most importantly, we show the technological comparison among them and also cover the dataset analysis for various applications. Finally, we address extensive research areas and future potential guidance regarding LLM-based AI research for the community.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
No Universal Courtesy: A Cross-Linguistic, Multi-Model Study of Politeness Effects on LLMs Using the PLUM Corpus
Politeness in prompts boosts average LLM response quality by up to 11% but the benefit is language- and model-dependent, with English favoring courteous tones, Hindi deferential ones, and Spanish assertive ones.
-
Syntax Is Easy, Semantics Is Hard: Evaluating LLMs for LTL Translation
LLMs handle LTL syntax better than semantics, improve with detailed prompts, and perform substantially better when the task is reframed as Python code completion.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.