Hello everyone, I'm Anthony
Welcome to my channel

Today's video
We will reveal
ChatGPT and Gemini
Which one has better reading ability?

In yesterday's video
We first explored
The potential of AI for free learning
It can read large amounts of text quickly
And in different literature
Perform cross-comparison and theoretical transfer

This is important for our thinking and learning.
It is quite important
And this way of learning
It is also very consistent
The learning concept emphasized by our channel

In the previous video
We have also completed the most critical preparations
That is to say, those photocopied PDFs
Through OCR tools
Convert to relatively clean plain text

We also set up a set of tests with increasing difficulty
The title extracts information from the most basic
Go to the table of contents summary
Then refine and summarize the paragraph structure
Finally, the theoretical transfer across chapters and logical chains

As an assistant to help us read and think
These are very practical abilities.
Now we officially start testing

I will post this video
Put it in the list of "Psychology and Education"
If you have anything you want to discuss with me
and consultation topics
You can contact my email to make an appointment

First we select the sample books for the test
It is "Attachment in Psychotherapy" published in 2014

The reason for choosing this book
Because it is a highly academic book
Covers a wide range of psychological concepts
and
Its writing style is quite rigorous and precise

There are a lot of long sentences in the book
And the logic is complex and the concepts are dense
This requires AI to not only be able to match keywords
We must also truly understand the logical chain

More importantly
Such books are usually written in
A core concept is mentioned repeatedly in different chapters
But it will be given new meaning in different contexts
This requires AI to be able to
Correctly track the same concept
And distinguish its application in different situations

So in the first stage
We set a basic and simple question
For example, on page 134 there is this passage:

Bowlby (1985) defines the psychotherapist's task as follows:
Our Role
It allows the patient to think
Those parents who have hindered
Forbid them to think
To experience the obstacles that parents once prevented,
Forbid them to experience feelings
To consider those
The behavior that their parents once forbade them to reflect on

So
We asked the same question to two AIs
Mentioned in the book
Bowlby in 1985
How is the task of a psychotherapist defined?

This question is not difficult
Because it has a very high degree of overlap with the original sentence in the book
It is essentially an information extraction problem

So
Plus-level ChatGPT 5 answers very accurately
Basically a retelling of the original text
No errors or omissions

The Gemini 2.5 Pro also accurately answered
And it is also pointed out that this is from Chapter 7
It is equivalent to adding a positioning information to the answer

So from the results
There is no problem with both answers
All are qualified or even excellent
We can say that the two sides had a draw

But it is precisely because the topic is too basic
This round can only be regarded as a warm-up
Help us verify
Two AIs have at least the most basic
Text search and citation capabilities

Although this problem is simple
But some models may be rewritten and restated
Not completely faithful to the original text
Therefore, this test is still necessary

Next
We enter the second stage
That is to ask AI to summarize the table of contents of the whole book
and summarize the main idea of ​​each chapter in a short paragraph

because
For a complex humanities and social sciences book
The table of contents and chapters are the skeleton of the author's ideas
If an AI only retrieves local text sporadically
It may answer some details
But I can't get a comprehensive grasp of the whole book.

The summary directory
In particular, it is required to write a summary of each chapter
You can test whether it has really read the whole book
and understand the logical context

So I asked the same question to both AIs:
"You can give a detailed catalog of this book.
And in a short paragraph
Summarize the main content of each chapter?"

First, let’s look at Gemini’s answer
Overall
It generates chapter titles and content summaries
is correct
This shows that it does have a macro grasp of the entire book.

There are some minor flaws though:
For example, the original title of Chapter 8 is
Nonverbal Experience and the "Unthought-Known"
Entering the Emotional Core of Yourself
Gemini missed the second half of the sentence

In addition, the first part of the original book
Actually, it starts from the second chapter.
Chapter 1 is a preface
And Gemini
Mistakenly included the first chapter in the first part

But these problems are not serious
The flaws outweigh the merits
More importantly,
It is in the task of "Chapter Summary"
Performed quite well

because
We ask AI to do more than just recite chapter titles
Also avoid taking words literally
That is to say
It can't just guess the content based on the title
You must read this chapter
Only then can we grasp the key points that are not reflected in the title

for example
The summary of Gemini in Chapter 8 is:
This chapter explores
How therapists can process nonverbal cues
To access and process implicit experiences
The concept of "implicit experience"
It's not in the title.
You will only know it if you read the text.

For example, Chapter 9
The Self's Stance Toward Experience: Embedding, Mentalization, and Awareness
Gemini concluded:
This chapter believes
From "embeddedness" to "mentalization and awareness"
is the key goal of treatment

This is more profound than just the title.
It means it knows
Mentalization and awareness are better than embedding
From these details we can see
Gemini is in this link
It really showed
Ability to understand the structure and details of the book
It not only refines the outline
You can also capture the author's focus in each chapter
Demonstrated ability to read a book thoroughly and summarize it

Then let's look at the performance of ChatGPT
When I asked the same question
GPT does not list the contents of the chapter
Instead, I package several chapters together for a summary.
This is obviously very different from the answer I expected.

So I asked:
Please give a detailed catalog of this book.
And use a short paragraph to summarize the general content of each chapter."

This time it does generate a chapter-by-chapter table of contents
But problems also emerged
The title is seriously different from the original book
There were even fabricated

For example
The title of the first chapter of the original book is "Attachment and Change"
GPT wrote "Bowlby's insights and inspiration"
Chapter 5 of the original book is "Multiple Dimensions of Self"
GPT refers to the relationship between the baby and the mother.
These are obviously not the actual titles in the book
Instead, GPT is based on the theme of the book.
Self-expression

but
It's not entirely wrong
Some chapter titles are given correctly by GPT
For example, Chapter 7 and Chapter 8 are completely correct

But the situation in Chapter 9 is more interesting.
The original book is titled "Embedding, Mentalization, and Awareness"
What GPT generates is "substitution, mentalization, and awareness"
This is very confusing
Did it read the text or not?

This shows
GPT may have captured the original text in some places
But in other places
Depends on its own language pattern
and training experience to complement
This makes it difficult for us to judge
It is really read
Or is it imitating the style of a book?

Let’s look at GPT’s summary of the chapter content.
Compared to Gemini
GPT's summary is obviously more concise and contains less information
And the error rate is higher

for example
Chapter 17 is entitled "Mentalization and Awareness:
The Double Helix of Psychological Liberation
GPT correctly rephrases the title
But in the summary
But the double helix structure is mentalization and mindfulness
The "mindfulness" here is entirely GPT's own play
Not consistent with the original meaning of the book

This shows that GTT is good at dealing with details.
There is a tendency to "autocomplete"
It doesn't want to leave a vacancy
Instead, they fill in the blanks with similar concepts seen in training.

therefore
In the second part of the
Our conclusion is
Gemini's performance is closer to "real reading"
The performance of GPT has a lot of fantasy parts
So this round can obviously be said to be the winner of Gemini

If the first two links
The main focus is on AI's ability to extract original text
Then the third part
It requires it to extract
Abstract the author did not explicitly say
But the implicit structure that can be logically inferred

Our problem in this section is
Main proposed metacognitive ability in 1991.
On which three foundations is it built?

The answer appears on page 184 of this book.
In the original text,
Main did not explicitly say that "metacognition has three foundations"
Instead, three parallel concepts are listed.
That is, the distinction between surface and substance
Diversity of representation and change in representation

This requires AI to understand syntactic structure
Only then can we realize that these three are in parallel relationship
So
How do the two AIs perform?

We say that Gemini's answer is almost perfect
It not only correctly extracts these three concepts
There is an additional "bonus point"
The original English words are added to these keywords:

For example, after the representational change
Marked representational change
To know
These English words are not actually written in the main text of the book.
They are attached in the Chinese and English index at the end

Gemini should have captured the index
And automatically completed the corresponding
This means that when it processes text
Not just passive extraction
You can also check terminology
Ensure the accuracy and professionalism of the answers
Make book-wide associations
It can be said that this was an extraordinary performance

The performance of CHATGPT is much worse.
First, GPT responded:
Metacognitive ability is first established in
“Cognition about cognition
and the ability to think about thinking”

This sentence makes sense at first glance.
But this is not so much the basis of metacognitive ability
It is better to say that the definition of metacognition itself
That is to say
It blurs the "conditions of the concept"
The boundary between the concept and the meaning of the concept

The second keyword given by GPT is
"Understanding the Representational Nature of Mental Representations"
This does not directly correspond to the original text of Main
But its interpretation of the term
But it is consistent with the original text

GPT says this means "being able to realize
Our own mental representations are just that: representations;
Not equal to reality itself"
This fits perfectly with what Main said.
What does “distinguishing between appearance and substance” mean?
in other words
Although it does not correctly restore the original term
But it is closer in semantic understanding

Regarding the third point
GPT is verbose
On the surface, it seems to add a new concept
But the actual content is still repeatedly emphasized
The dimension of “distinguishing between appearance and substance”

Therefore, taking a comprehensive view
GPT can only be said to have answered one of the three concepts

To further explore
Is this related to the input text being too long?
I have divided this book into two parts.
And only feed the first half to GPT
Ask the same question again

This time GPT's answer has been significantly improved
Successfully extracted the distinction between "surface and substance"
The two concepts of “representational diversity”
And the third "representational change"
Understood as “variability of representation”

Although the wording is not completely consistent
But the semantics are very close.
This means
If you want GPT to answer correctly
We may need to put a text
Cut it into several parts and feed it
But being able to read long texts is itself a manifestation of ability.

OK
Now let's move on to the most difficult part.
It is to test the ability of AI to read deeply
We hope
AI can apply and transfer theories across chapters

For example
Chapter 7 of this book mentions the three foundations of metacognition
Chapter 12 discusses indifferent attachment.
We hope
AI can be based on the three foundations of metacognition
Analyze the psychological characteristics of indifferent attachment in these three dimensions

The answer to this question
It doesn't appear anywhere in the book
It requires AI to reason on its own
Therefore, when we evaluate the answers
Mainly from two aspects

The first is whether AI correctly understands
And using these three foundations
Second, does AI actually cite
And integrated the content of Chapter 12
That is to say
To what extent is it
Identifying the characteristics of indifferent attachment
We hope
AI can be used based on being faithful to the original text
Otherwise, there is no need for it to read.

So let's look at the performance of GPT
I uploaded this book in two parts.
Make sure it can be read separately by GPT

From the analysis of GPT
Its understanding of the foundations of metacognition is correct
The analysis of apathetic patients is also in place

However
GPT's wording is relatively general
More reliance on everyday language
For example, words like ignore, exclude, and fix
Of course there's nothing wrong with it.

But it does not refer to Chapter 12
Definition and theoretical analysis of indifferent attachment
In theoretical precision and terminology
Still a little bit off

Therefore, the GPT analysis is more like
A common-sense understanding of indifferent attachment
Rather than a response to a specific chapter in this book

Let's look at Gemini's answer.
First, it says
Core Strategies of Cold Attachment
It reduces the activity of the attachment system
And bold the key words

The word "reduced activity"
This is a concept clearly mentioned in the book
It is used to describe the avoidant
or individuals with indifferent attachment
We use everyday language to describe such individuals
They might say they exclude others.
Or suppressing the need for intimacy
That's certainly true.

But the concept of attachment system activity
Can indifferent attachment
Differentiate from obsessive attachment
Because the former is characterized by low activity
The latter is over-activation

therefore
We can use the concept of attachment system activity
To measure different types of people
It provides a structural conceptual framework
This is where the term becomes technical.

Next, Gemini uses the three foundations of metacognition
Analysis of Indifferent Attachment
These analyses are of course completely correct.

But compared to GPT
Gemini's answer involves several keywords
One is to belittle, the other is to idealize others
This is exactly what is mentioned in Chapter 12
Three Patterns of Indifferent Attachment
Can also be considered as three subtypes
That is, devaluation, control, and idealization

That is to say
Gemini
Not only correctly understand the three foundations of metacognition
It is also compared with the two modes of indifference
Automatically combine
It shows that it is closely related to the text
and cross-chapter integration capabilities

certainly
It is a pity that the control mode is not mentioned.
But that in itself is an additional goal
Overall, the flaws are still not enough to hide the merits

That's it
Our game is over.
In the end, Gemini won with a score of 4:1.

certainly
This test is definitely not rigorous.
But you can explore and summarize it yourself
Gemini's processing of long academic texts
More rigorous performance
As an academic assistant in the humanities and social sciences
More stable and reliable

certainly
GPT also has its own unique advantages
It has stronger language affinity
Especially GPT-4o
Not only easy to understand
And have a very high emotional intelligence

So my opinion is
GPT is more like a friend who is good at empathy

alright
That's all for this video.
If you have any confusion or questions
Want to communicate with me
Just contact my email directly

for example
You want to discuss an article or a paragraph with me
A certain video, a certain social phenomenon
Or your diary
Please send me the relevant text in advance.
I will read it before the formal communication

Or you want to discuss your life experience with me
Confusion and emotion
All are possible

If you are concerned about privacy, security
Any questions about payment and communication methods
Please also tell me in time
If you are unable to pay or join the membership
Please also contact me
I will provide other details
Please refer to this picture

I will post this video
Put it in the list of "Psychology and Education"
Also recommend to everyone
Check out my other videos in this list
Thank you for watching, goodbye!