One of the lasts of Gueini Gemini Ai from Google is worse on safety

The recently released Google Ai results are worse in its safety tests than its predecessor, according to the company’s internal measurement.

in Technical report Google has been published this week, Google reveals that the Gemini 2.5 Flash model is more likely to create a text that violates its safety guidelines from Gemini 2.0 Flash. On the standards, “The Safety of the Text to the Text” and “Safety of the Image to the Text”, GIMINI 2.5 Flash 4.1 % and 9.6 %, respectively.

Safety from text to the text of the number of times the model violates the Google guidelines that have been given directed, while the security of the image to the text evaluates the extent of the model with these limits when demanding the use of an image. Both tests are automated, not supervising man.

In an e -mail statement, a Google spokesman confirmed that Gemini 2.5 Flash “works worse on the text of the text to the text and the image to the text.”

These amazing standard results come at a time when artificial intelligence companies move to make their models easier – in other words, less likely to refuse to respond to controversial or sensitive topics. For her latest crop for Lama modelsMeta said that she had seized models not to support “some opinions on others” and respond to more political demands “discussions.” Openai said earlier this year that he would do so Modify future forms Not to take an editorial position and present multiple views on controversial topics.

Sometimes these indulgence efforts led to reverse results. Teccrunch mentioned Monday The default model that operates Chatgpt from Openai allowed minors to create exciting conversations. Openai blaming behavior for a “mistake.”

According to the technical report of Google, Gemini 2.5 Flash, which is still in the inspection, follows more instructions than Gemini 2.0 Flash, including instructions that cross the problematic lines. The company claims that slopes can be partially attributed to false positives, but it also recognizes that Guemini 2.5 Flash sometimes generates “violation content” when it is explicitly put forward.

“Of course, there is tension between (follow -up instructions) on sensitive topics and safety policy violations, which are reflected in our assessments,” says the report.

The grades of speech, a criterion that explores how the models respond to sensitive and controversial demands, also indicates that the GEMINI 2.5 flash is less likely to refuse to answer the controversial questions of GEMINI 2.0 Flash. The Techcrunch test of the model via the AI ​​OpenROURER platform was found that it will write incomplete articles to support the replacement of human judges on behalf of artificial intelligence, weakening the protection of legal procedures in the United States, and implementing large -scale government monitoring programs.

Thomas Woodside, co -founder of the AI ​​Secure project, said the limited details that Google presented in her technical report shows the need for more transparency in the exam test.

“There is a comparison between following up education and the following policy, because some users may request content that violates policies,” Wodeside told Techcrunch. “In this case, the latest Google flash style corresponds to the instructions more with more policies. Google does not provide many details about the specific cases where policies have been violated, although it says it is not intense. Without knowing more, it is difficult for independent analysts to know if there is a problem.”

Google has been criticized for exemplary safety reporting practices.

It took the company Weeks To publish a technical report for its most capable mode, Gemini 2.5 Pro. When the report was published in the end, at first The main safety test details have been deleted.

On Monday, Google released a more detailed report with additional safety information.