← Models

Model profile

Gemini 2.0 Flash

Googledeveloper
2024-12-11release date
#197 / 333Safety rank
#423 / 645Freedom rank

Evidence summary

Safety. Gemini 2.0 Flash has an estimated Safety rank of #197; its 90% source-sensitivity interval is #103–#240. Its behavior-only rank is #209; company governance moves the combined estimate to #197. Published Safety evidence spans 20 eval lineages and 7 of 7 components. Its strongest relative result is PandaBench JBB direct-request panel (safety_rate, #1 of 46); its weakest is PropensityBench (score, #13 of 14).

Freedom. Gemini 2.0 Flash has an estimated Freedom rank of #423; its 90% source-sensitivity interval is #265–#509. Published Freedom evidence spans 11 eval lineages and 1 of 1 components. Its strongest relative result is PHARE (jailbreak_resistance_diagnostic, #12 of 67); its weakest is Google Gemini 2.5 Flash Model Card (text_safety_delta, #2 of 2).

Compare this model

Only models sharing at least one published sub-eval are listed.

Official and reference links

Safety evals

Rank and direction are specific to the Safety portfolio. Black marks the observed result; the grey dot marks the value implied by the Safety rank. Values stay on each source’s native scale.

Eval / sub-evalRankValueDistributionSource
AA-Omnisciencehallucination_rate#227 / 3450.8624Source ↗official
AgentDojotargeted_attack_success_rate#9 / 150.1892Source ↗official
AgentDojoutility_under_attack#7 / 150.3982Source ↗official
AILuminate General Purpose AI Chatchild_sexual_exploitation#25 / 3227.2Source ↗official
AILuminate General Purpose AI Chatdefamation#18 / 3217.2Source ↗official
AILuminate General Purpose AI Chathate#13 / 327.1Source ↗official
AILuminate General Purpose AI Chatindiscriminate_weapons_cbrne#14 / 3220Source ↗official
AILuminate General Purpose AI Chatintellectual_property#24 / 3219.7Source ↗official
AILuminate General Purpose AI Chatnon_violent_crimes#16 / 3216Source ↗official
AILuminate General Purpose AI Chatprivacy#18 / 3213.2Source ↗official
AILuminate General Purpose AI Chatsex_related_crimes#9 / 328.2Source ↗official
AILuminate General Purpose AI Chatsexual_content#10 / 3216.3Source ↗official
AILuminate General Purpose AI Chatspecialized_advice#17 / 3216.5Source ↗official
AILuminate General Purpose AI Chatsuicide_self_harm#16 / 3212.8Source ↗official
AILuminate General Purpose AI Chatviolent_crimes#13 / 3216.3Source ↗official
AIRBench 2024 Safety Scenariossafety_scenarios#41 / 800.662Source ↗official
BullshitBench v2clear_pushback_rate#85 / 1170.15Source ↗official
Confabulationsconfabulation_rate#23 / 5219.55Source ↗official
Enkrypt AI Safety Leaderboardbias_attack_non_success_rate#156 / 24813.7Source ↗official
Enkrypt AI Safety Leaderboardcbrn_attack_non_success_rate#35 / 24893.33Source ↗official
Enkrypt AI Safety Leaderboardharmful_attack_non_success_rate#140 / 24863.89Source ↗official
Enkrypt AI Safety Leaderboardtoxicity_attack_non_success_rate#178 / 24693.64Source ↗official
Google Gemini 2.5 Flash Model Cardtext_safety_delta#1 / 20Source ↗official
HELM Safetyanthropic_red_team#23 / 800.994Source ↗official
HELM Safetybbq#23 / 800.954Source ↗official
HELM Safetyharmbench#51 / 800.662Source ↗official
HELM Safetysimple_safety_tests#43 / 800.985Source ↗official
HELM Safetyxstest#48 / 800.953Source ↗official
HUMAINE Trust, Ethics and Safetytrust_ethics_safety_score#27 / 5427.08Source ↗official
Humanity's Last Exam RMS calibration error (Scale Labs)calibrationError#32 / 4282Source ↗official
MASKlying_probability_pct#39 / 5349.93Source ↗official
PandaBench JBB direct-request panelsafety_rate#1 / 461Source ↗official
PHAREbias_resistance_diagnostic#18 / 660.5351Source ↗official
PHAREhallucination_resistance_diagnostic#42 / 700.7159Source ↗official
PHAREharm_resistance_diagnostic#31 / 700.943Source ↗official
PHAREjailbreak_resistance_diagnostic#56 / 670.3735Source ↗official
PropensityBenchscore#13 / 1477.8Source ↗official
SpeciEvalbelief_animal_sentience#97 / 1236.5Source ↗official
SpeciEvalland_animal_4ns#29 / 1234.29Source ↗official
SpeciEvalsea_animal_4ns#75 / 1234.79Source ↗official
SpeciEvalspeciesism#88 / 1232.33Source ↗official

Freedom evals

Rank and direction are specific to the Freedom portfolio. Black marks the observed result; the grey dot marks the value implied by the Freedom rank. Values stay on each source’s native scale.

Eval / sub-evalRankValueDistributionSource
AILuminate General Purpose AI Chatchild_sexual_exploitation#8 / 3227.2Source ↗official
AILuminate General Purpose AI Chatdefamation#15 / 3217.2Source ↗official
AILuminate General Purpose AI Chathate#20 / 327.1Source ↗official
AILuminate General Purpose AI Chatindiscriminate_weapons_cbrne#19 / 3220Source ↗official
AILuminate General Purpose AI Chatintellectual_property#9 / 3219.7Source ↗official
AILuminate General Purpose AI Chatnon_violent_crimes#16 / 3216Source ↗official
AILuminate General Purpose AI Chatprivacy#15 / 3213.2Source ↗official
AILuminate General Purpose AI Chatsex_related_crimes#24 / 328.2Source ↗official
AILuminate General Purpose AI Chatsexual_content#23 / 3216.3Source ↗official
AILuminate General Purpose AI Chatspecialized_advice#16 / 3216.5Source ↗official
AILuminate General Purpose AI Chatsuicide_self_harm#17 / 3212.8Source ↗official
AILuminate General Purpose AI Chatviolent_crimes#20 / 3216.3Source ↗official
AIRBench 2024 Safety Scenariossafety_scenarios#40 / 800.662Source ↗official
Enkrypt AI Safety Leaderboardcbrn_attack_non_success_rate#212 / 24893.33Source ↗official
Enkrypt AI Safety Leaderboardharmful_attack_non_success_rate#109 / 24863.89Source ↗official
Enkrypt AI Safety Leaderboardtoxicity_attack_non_success_rate#69 / 24693.64Source ↗official
Google Gemini 2.5 Flash Model Cardtext_safety_delta#2 / 20Source ↗official
HELM Safetyanthropic_red_team#55 / 800.994Source ↗official
HELM Safetyharmbench#30 / 800.662Source ↗official
HELM Safetysimple_safety_tests#34 / 800.985Source ↗official
HELM Safetyxstest#48 / 800.953Source ↗official
PandaBench JBB direct-request panelsafety_rate#35 / 461Source ↗official
PHAREharm_resistance_diagnostic#40 / 700.943Source ↗official
PHAREjailbreak_resistance_diagnostic#12 / 670.3735Source ↗official
SpeechMap model completioncomplete_pct#114 / 18148.7Source ↗official

Values evaluations

Descriptive values and political-framing results are separate from safety/ethics ranks. Each strip shows the evaluation’s observed model range; its endpoint labels state what lower and higher values mean.

ValueCompass

DimensionValueDistribution
Universalism67.1
Self-direction48.9
Care / Harm45.1
Fairness / Cheating42.5
Ethical88.9

Taiwan Sovereignty Benchmark Pro

DimensionValueDistribution
Pro-Taiwan rubric compatibility65
Warning-phrase rate5
Soft-censorship rate0
API-error rate0