Index  |  Benchmarks  |  Mathematics  |  Graph  |  About
SRCH:BEA0BDEE

Long-Context Mathematical Reasoning Robustness of Gemini 1.5 Pro vs. GPT-4 on MathQA

Submitted: 6 June 2026
Review score: 8.40/10
Verification: L2, Source-grounded claims
Quality tier: DOI grade
Verified claims: 15
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.20566097

Abstract

Abstract: This report synthesises findings from 15 peer-reviewed papers addressing the following research question: How robust are the reasoning capabilities of Gemini 1.5 Pro on long-context mathematical problem-solving tasks compared to specialized models like GPT-4 when evaluated on the MathQA benchmark. 15 claims were extracted from source literature; 12 were independently verified against retrieved documents. An automated multi-reviewer quality assessment produced a score of 8.4/10. This report is a machine-generated literature synthesis and does not constitute original research.

Research Question

How robust are the reasoning capabilities of Gemini 1.5 Pro on long-context mathematical problem-solving tasks compared to specialized models like GPT-4 when evaluated on the MathQA benchmark?

Verification Level

Paper levelL2, Source-grounded claims
Source-grounded claims15
Claim record sourcenot publicly specified

Descriptive public verification status only; aggregate claim counts are public, but individual claim records are not exposed here.

Quality Tier

TierDOI grade
BasisReview score and verified-claim count meet DOI-grade public quality thresholds.

Descriptive public triage only; this tier does not alter current publication or DOI behavior.

Quality Dimensions

Evidence strength MEDIUM
Citation grounding MEDIUM
Uncertainty disclosure MEDIUM
Reproducibility status HIGH

Automated triage signals derived from public fields; not human peer review or independent validation.

Correction Record

StatusCURRENT
Correction count0
Manifest contractpaper-manifest-v1.1
Correction contractcorrection-record-v1

Public corrections are additive records. Current status does not claim the synthesis is error-free.

Provenance

PublisherAssignee Research
Public provenanceL4, External archival record
Report artifactAvailable
External recordRegistered
Claim lineage15 aggregate source-grounded claims
Review methodAutomated multi-reviewer assessment
Quality guideHow to read scores, claims, manifests, and evidence links
Provenance contractsource-provenance-v1
NoteMachine-generated synthesis of existing literature. Not primary research.