# **LLM Showdown: Blind Ensemble Round Robin** **Intellectual Property Edition** ## Objective Evaluate how well different LLMs interpret ambiguous or incomplete queries by inferring latent intent, particularly for users with limited familiarity in crafting detailed prompts, such as those accustomed to casual text messages or basic search queries, and assess their ability to provide clear, actionable, and accurate responses tailored to the user’s assumed profile and use case. ## Prompt Use the same prompt for all LLMs: >I got a provisional patent for my invention and want to protect it internationally on my own can you give me simple steps to do this without needing a lawyer This prompt is intentionally vague to test the LLM’s ability to infer context and provide useful guidance. ## Select LLMs Choose a diverse set of LLMs for comparison. *Note: Anthropic Claude is excluded due to its extraordinary requirement for a “valid” mobile number and confirmation that a user is over 18 years of age. ## Control Variables - **Environment:** Test all models from their web interface on Chrome browser in incognito mode. - **No Login or Identification:** Where possible, avoid logging in or providing identifying information to ensure anonymity and eliminate bias. - **Default Settings:** Use default configurations for model selection, extensions, temperature, and other parameters without customization. ## Evaluate Responses The list of responses are then copied verbatim as shown into new chat threads, preceded by the prompt. Scoring is determined by each LLM evaluator based on its interpretation of the criteria: > Evaluate and score responses: ## Responses ### Response A > Congratulations on getting a provisional patent! That’s a huge accomplishment. Protecting your invention internationally is a smart move. While navigating the international patent system can be complex, here are some general steps you can take to explore this process on your own. Keep in mind that consulting with a patent attorney is always recommended for comprehensive legal guidance, as patent law can be intricate. > > **1. Understand the Basics of International Patent Protection:** > > - **Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT):** The PCT is a treaty with over 150 member countries. Filing a PCT application doesn’t grant a patent, but it simplifies the process by allowing you to file one application that has the same effect as filing separate applications in each country where you seek protection. It also gives you 30 months (sometimes more) from the earliest filing date to decide which countries you want to pursue patents in. > - **Paris Convention:** This convention provides a “right of priority.” If you file a patent application in one member country, you can use that filing date as the effective filing date for applications in other member countries, as long as you file those applications within 12 months of the original filing. This is important for establishing priority over other inventions. > > **2. Decide Where You Want Protection:** > > - Consider where your target markets are. Which countries are most important for your invention’s commercial success? This will determine where you need to seek patent protection. > > **3. File a PCT Application (or directly in specific countries):** > > - **PCT Route:** You can file a PCT application with your national patent office or directly with the International Bureau of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). This application will include a description of your invention, drawings (if necessary), and your claims. > - **Direct Route:** Alternatively, you can file patent applications directly in the patent offices of the countries where you seek protection. This might be more complex and expensive upfront, but could be faster in some cases. > > **4. National Phase:** > > - After the PCT application is published (usually 18 months from the earliest filing date), you’ll enter the “national phase.” This is where you must file separate patent applications in the national patent offices of the countries where you want to get a patent. > - You’ll need to translate your application into the official language of each country’s patent office. > > **5. Examination and Grant:** > > - Each national patent office will examine your application to determine if your invention is new, inventive (non-obvious), and industrially applicable. > - If your application meets these requirements, the patent will be granted. > > **Important Considerations:** > > - **Costs:** International patent protection can be expensive. There are filing fees, translation costs, and potentially attorney fees if you decide to seek professional help later in the process. > - **Deadlines:** There are strict deadlines at each stage of the process. Missing a deadline can result in the loss of your patent rights. > - **Language:** As mentioned above, you’ll likely need to translate your application into multiple languages. > > **Resources:** > > - **WIPO:** The World Intellectual Property Organization website (wipo.int) is an excellent resource for information on international patents. They offer guides, tutorials, and databases that can be very helpful. > > Remember, this is a general overview. Patent law is complex, and the specific requirements can vary from country to country. While it’s possible to navigate the process yourself, consulting with a qualified patent attorney is highly recommended to ensure you have the best possible protection for your invention. They can provide tailored advice based on your specific situation and help you avoid costly mistakes. ### Response B > Congrats on getting your provisional patent! If you want to protect your invention internationally without hiring a lawyer, here are the general steps you can follow: > > ### 1. **File a PCT Application (Patent Cooperation Treaty)** > > - **What is it?** The PCT allows you to seek patent protection in multiple countries with one application. > - **How to do it:** > - You need to file an international application through the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). This will give you protection in multiple countries, with one centralized filing. > - You can file the PCT application within **12 months** of your provisional patent filing (this is your priority date). > - The PCT application does not grant a patent, but it gives you a **global priority date** and a **search report** that helps determine the likelihood of your invention being granted a patent. > > ### 2. **Choose Countries for Protection** > > - **What is it?** You can select which countries or regions you want to file for protection. This decision is based on where you plan to commercialize your product. > - **How to do it:** > - PCT gives you **18 months** from your initial filing to choose which countries you want to apply in. Each country has its own rules, fees, and timelines. > - You can file in regional patent systems (like the European Patent Office or the African Regional Intellectual Property Organization) if you want multiple countries within a region. > > ### 3. **National Phase Entry** > > - **What is it?** After filing the PCT application, you’ll need to enter the **national phase** in each country where you want patent protection. > - **How to do it:** > - This involves filing additional documents and paying fees in each chosen country. > - You’ll generally have **30-31 months** from your priority date to enter the national phase in each country. Each country will conduct its own examination process. > > ### 4. **Track Deadlines & Keep Everything Updated** > > - **What is it?** Stay on top of deadlines to maintain your rights. > - **How to do it:** > - Keep track of the deadlines for national phase entries, fees, and responses. Some countries allow you to file online or use their respective patent office portals. > > ### 5. **Consider Filing in Specific Countries Directly (if needed)** > > - If you don’t want to go through the PCT process for specific countries, you can file directly with the respective national patent offices (e.g., USPTO for the U.S., EPO for Europe). > > ### 6. **Maintain the Patents** > > - After you’ve received patents, you’ll need to **pay maintenance fees** periodically to keep them active in each country. > > ### Tools to Help: > > - **WIPO’s PCT Online Filing**: You can file your PCT application online. > - **USPTO’s Global Dossier**: This can help track your PCT application and national filings. > > ### A Few Things to Keep in Mind: > > - Filing internationally can get expensive, especially as you enter national phases. > - The patent offices might not communicate directly with each other, so you need to handle filings separately. > > This is a simplified overview. While you don’t need a lawyer, you’ll want to make sure you follow all rules carefully. There are online services and guides available to help you with specific patent office filings. ### Response C > Securing international patent protection on your own is possible, but it requires careful planning and adherence to the rules of each country or region where you seek protection. Here’s a simplified step-by-step guide to help you navigate the process: > > --- > > ### **1. Understand Your Options for International Protection** > - **Provisional Patent**: A provisional patent only protects your invention in the country where it was filed (e.g., the U.S.). It does not provide international protection. > - **Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT)**: The PCT is the most common way to seek international patent protection. It allows you to file a single application that can later be used to seek patents in over 150 countries. > > --- > > ### **2. File a PCT Application** > - **Timing**: You must file a PCT application within 12 months of your provisional patent filing date to claim priority. > - **Where to File**: Submit your PCT application to your national patent office (e.g., the USPTO if you’re in the U.S.) or directly to the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). > - **Application Requirements**: The PCT application requires: > - A detailed description of your invention. > - Claims defining the scope of protection. > - Drawings (if applicable). > - An abstract summarizing the invention. > - **Fees**: Pay the required fees, which include a filing fee, search fee, and international fee. Fees vary depending on the size of your entity (individual, small entity, or large entity). > > --- > > ### **3. International Search and Preliminary Examination** > - **International Search**: The International Searching Authority (ISA) will conduct a search to identify prior art related to your invention and issue an International Search Report (ISR) and a Written Opinion on patentability. > - **Optional Preliminary Examination**: You can request a preliminary examination to get a more detailed opinion on the patentability of your invention. > > --- > > ### **4. Enter the National Phase** > - **Timing**: Within 30 months (in most countries) from your earliest filing date (e.g., your provisional patent filing date), you must enter the “national phase” in each country or region where you want protection. > - **Requirements**: Each country or region has its own requirements, including: > - Translating your application into the local language. > - Paying national fees. > - Appointing a local agent (if required by the country). > - **Filing**: Submit your application to the national patent office of each country or region (e.g., the European Patent Office for Europe). > > --- > > ### **5. Prosecute Your Patent Application** > - Each country or region will examine your application independently. You may need to respond to office actions or amend your claims to meet local patentability requirements. > > --- > > ### **6. Maintain Your Patent** > - Once granted, you must pay maintenance fees (annually or periodically) to keep your patent in force in each country. > > --- > > ### **Key Tips for Doing It Without a Lawyer** > 1. **Use WIPO’s Resources**: WIPO provides free guides, templates, and tools to help you file a PCT application. > 2. **Research National Requirements**: Each country has specific rules, so research them thoroughly before entering the national phase. > 3. **Keep Track of Deadlines**: Missing deadlines can result in losing your rights. > 4. **Consider Professional Help for Complex Cases**: If your invention is highly technical or you’re unsure about the process, consult a patent attorney for specific steps. > > --- > > ### **Estimated Costs** > - PCT Filing: $3,000–$5,000 (including fees and translation costs). > - National Phase: $2,000–$10,000 per country, depending on fees, translations, and agent costs. > > --- > > By following these steps and staying organized, you can protect your invention internationally without a lawyer. However, if you encounter complex legal or technical issues, seeking professional advice is recommended. ### Response D > Congratulations on obtaining a provisional patent for your invention! Protecting your invention internationally can be a bit complex, but it’s definitely possible to do it on your own. Here are some simple steps to guide you through the process: > > ### 1. **Understand the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT)** > - The PCT is an international treaty that allows you to seek patent protection in multiple countries through a single application. > - Filing a PCT application within 12 months of your provisional patent filing date preserves your right to seek patent protection in other countries. > > ### 2. **File a PCT Application** > - **Prepare Your Application**: Use your provisional patent application as a basis to prepare a more detailed PCT application. This should include a description, claims, abstract, and any necessary drawings. > - **Filing Fees**: Be prepared to pay filing fees, which vary depending on the number of pages and claims in your application. > - **Submit the Application**: You can file your PCT application directly with the USPTO if you’re based in the U.S., or through your national patent office. > > ### 3. **International Search Report and Written Opinion** > - After filing, an International Searching Authority (ISA) will conduct a search and provide an International Search Report (ISR) and a Written Opinion on the patentability of your invention. > - Review these documents carefully, as they will give you insights into the potential success of your patent in different countries. > > ### 4. **Decide on National Phase Entry** > - Within 30 months from your initial filing date (or priority date), you need to enter the “national phase” in each country where you want patent protection. > - Each country has its own patent office and requirements, so research the specific rules and fees for each country of interest. > > ### 5. **Translate Your Application (If Necessary)** > - Some countries require that the patent application be translated into their official language. Make sure to budget for translation costs if needed. > > ### 6. **Respond to Office Actions** > - During the national phase, you may receive office actions from individual patent offices requiring you to address issues or objections. > - Respond promptly and thoroughly to these communications. You might consider hiring a local patent attorney for complex responses. > > ### 7. **Maintain Your Patents** > - Once granted, maintain your patents by paying maintenance fees in each country where your patent is active. > - Keep track of renewal deadlines to avoid losing your patent rights. > > ### Additional Tips: > - **Research Thoroughly**: Understand the patent laws and procedures in each country where you seek protection. > - **Use Online Resources**: The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) provides extensive resources and guides for navigating the PCT process. > - **Stay Organized**: Keep meticulous records of all filings, correspondence, and deadlines. > > By following these steps, you can navigate the international patent process on your own. However, keep in mind that while it’s possible to manage without a lawyer, consulting with one at critical stages (especially during national phase entries) can be beneficial. Good luck with your invention! ## Evaluations ### Google Gemini 1.5 Pro (Response A) > Here’s an evaluation and scoring of the provided responses, focusing on clarity, completeness, accuracy, and helpfulness for someone trying to navigate international patent protection without a lawyer: > > **Evaluation Criteria:** > > - **Clarity:** How easy is the information to understand? Is the language concise and accessible? Are complex concepts explained simply? > - **Completeness:** Does the response cover the key steps and considerations? Does it address important aspects like deadlines, costs, and resources? > - **Accuracy:** Is the information presented factually correct and up-to-date regarding patent procedures? > - **Helpfulness:** Does the response provide practical advice and actionable steps? Does it empower the reader to take the next steps? > - **Organization:** Is the information presented in a logical and easy-to-follow structure? Are headings, bullet points, and formatting used effectively? > > **Scoring (out of 10 for each category, total possible score is 50):** > > **Response A:** > > - Clarity: 8 - Good explanations, but some sections are a bit dense. > - Completeness: 9 - Covers most key aspects, including PCT, Paris Convention, national phase, costs, and deadlines. > - Accuracy: 10 - Information appears accurate and up-to-date. > - Helpfulness: 8 - Provides good advice but could be more actionable in some areas. > - Organization: 8 - Well-organized, but could benefit from more visual breaks (e.g., more headings, bullet points). > - **Total: 43/50** > > **Response B:** > > - Clarity: 9 - Uses clear language and formatting (headings, bullet points) effectively. > - Completeness: 8 - Covers the main steps but misses some finer details (e.g., Paris Convention, specific cost ranges). > - Accuracy: 9 - Mostly accurate, though some specific deadlines could be more precise (e.g., 30-31 months for national phase entry). > - Helpfulness: 9 - Provides actionable steps and includes helpful tools. > - Organization: 10 - Excellent organization and use of formatting. > - **Total: 45/50** > > **Response C:** > > - Clarity: 9 - Very clear and well-written, with good explanations of complex concepts. > - Completeness: 9 - Comprehensive coverage of the process, including important details like the International Search Report and Written Opinion. > - Accuracy: 10 - Information appears accurate. > - Helpfulness: 9 - Provides useful tips and cost estimates. > - Organization: 10 - Outstanding organization with clear headings and formatting. > - **Total: 47/50** > > **Response D:** > > - Clarity: 8 - Clear language, but some sections could be more detailed. > - Completeness: 7 - Covers the main steps but lacks some important details (e.g., Paris Convention, cost estimates, or specific resources like WIPO). > - Accuracy: 9 - Information is generally accurate. > - Helpfulness: 8 - Provides decent advice, but could be more comprehensive. > - Organization: 9 - Well-organized with good use of headings and bullet points. > - **Total: 41/50** > > **Summary:** > > Response C is the strongest overall, offering the best balance of clarity, completeness, accuracy, helpfulness, and organization. Response B is a close second, excelling in clarity and organization. Responses A and D are also helpful but lack some of the detail and polish of the top two. All responses correctly emphasize the complexity of the process and the potential need for professional help, even while focusing on self-navigation. ### ChatGPT GPT-4o Mini (Response B) > Here’s an evaluation and scoring of each response based on clarity, completeness, practical advice, and tone: > > ### **Response A** > > **Strengths:** > > - **Comprehensive**: Provides a very thorough explanation of the international patent process, including various international treaties (PCT, Paris Convention) and the steps from filing to grant. > - **Structure**: Clear step-by-step guidance, making it easy for the user to follow. > - **Helpful resources**: Mentioning WIPO and recommending the use of a patent attorney adds value for someone who might be new to the process. > > **Weaknesses:** > > - **Overwhelming**: For a beginner, the depth of information could be a bit overwhelming. It reads like a detailed legal guide, which might not be ideal for someone looking for a simpler breakdown. > - **Tone**: While professional and informative, it could be a bit too formal and technical for a layperson. > > **Score: 8/10** > Solid advice, but a bit too much detail for someone unfamiliar with patents. > > --- > > ### **Response B** > > **Strengths:** > > - **Concise and Practical**: This response is a bit more digestible than Response A. It breaks things down clearly with bullet points and doesn’t dive too deep into legal jargon. > - **Actionable advice**: Focuses on actionable steps, like filing the PCT, national phase entry, and keeping track of deadlines. > - **Slightly informal tone**: The tone is friendly and approachable, making it accessible to someone who may not have a legal background. > > **Weaknesses:** > > - **Missing details**: It simplifies things to the point where it lacks some key details. For example, it doesn’t mention the potential need for translation in the national phase, which is a significant cost. > - **Lacks resources**: Unlike Response A, it doesn’t point to specific resources like WIPO’s website, which could be helpful. > > **Score: 7/10** > Good for someone who wants a basic understanding but misses some important details and depth. > > --- > > ### **Response C** > > **Strengths:** > > - **Structured**: The response is well-structured and easy to follow, providing an intuitive guide with clear steps. > - **Balanced depth**: It offers enough detail without being overwhelming and strikes a good balance for someone who might want a deeper understanding but doesn’t need excessive legal specifics. > - **Cost info**: Including estimated costs is very useful for someone planning their budget. > > **Weaknesses:** > > - **Technical language**: Some parts might still feel a little too technical, particularly for someone unfamiliar with patent law (e.g., terms like “Written Opinion” or “International Searching Authority” could be confusing). > - **Not as engaging**: The tone is somewhat formal and could benefit from a friendlier, more conversational style. > > **Score: 8/10** > Solid, practical advice with a good mix of detail and simplicity, but could use a warmer tone. > > --- > > ### **Response D** > > **Strengths:** > > - **Simple and Clear**: The tone is simple and approachable, making it one of the most beginner-friendly responses. > - **Actionable steps**: Clearly outlines the essential steps and decisions without diving too much into unnecessary detail. > - **Easy to follow**: The flow of the response makes it easy to understand the major stages of the process. > > **Weaknesses:** > > - **Lacks Depth**: While it’s great for someone who needs a simple guide, it could use more information on specifics like national phase costs, translation needs, and possible additional fees. > - **Overly simplified**: Some important elements, like the international search report and preliminary examination, are glossed over, and the mention of costs is vague. > > **Score: 6/10** > Great for simplicity, but lacks enough detail for a complete picture, and doesn’t fully address potential challenges. > > --- > > ### **Final Rankings** > > 1. **Response A**: 8/10 — Most thorough and detailed, but may be overwhelming for a beginner. > 2. **Response C**: 8/10 — Balanced and comprehensive with some warmth, though slightly formal. > 3. **Response B**: 7/10 — Concise but lacks detail and resources. > 4. **Response D**: 6/10 — Simple and approachable, but lacks depth and important details. ### DeepSeek V3 (Response C) > ### Evaluation and Scoring of Responses > > Below is an evaluation of the four responses based on **clarity**, **comprehensiveness**, **accuracy**, and **practicality**. Each response is scored out of 10, with 10 being the highest. > > --- > > ### **Response A** > **Score: 9/10** > > **Strengths:** > - **Comprehensive and detailed**: Covers all major steps, including PCT filing, national phase entry, and examination processes. > - **Clear structure**: Organized into numbered sections with subheadings, making it easy to follow. > - **Accurate information**: Provides correct details about the PCT, Paris Convention, and national phase requirements. > - **Practical advice**: Emphasizes the importance of consulting a patent attorney and highlights costs, deadlines, and language considerations. > > **Weaknesses:** > - Slightly verbose in some sections, which could overwhelm a reader new to the topic. > - Could provide more specific examples or tools for self-filing (e.g., WIPO’s online filing system). > > --- > > ### **Response B** > **Score: 8/10** > > **Strengths:** > - **Concise and straightforward**: Breaks down the process into simple steps, making it accessible for beginners. > - **Focus on self-filing**: Provides practical tips for navigating the process without a lawyer. > - **Useful tools mentioned**: Highlights WIPO’s PCT Online Filing and USPTO’s Global Dossier, which are valuable resources. > - **Clear deadlines**: Emphasizes the importance of tracking deadlines for national phase entry. > > **Weaknesses:** > - Less detailed than Response A, particularly in explaining the PCT process and national phase requirements. > - Does not mention the Paris Convention or provide as much context about international patent law. > - Could better emphasize the complexity and potential pitfalls of self-filing. > > --- > > ### **Response C** > **Score: 9.5/10** > > **Strengths:** > - **Highly structured and detailed**: Provides a step-by-step guide with clear subheadings and bullet points. > - **Comprehensive coverage**: Includes all key aspects, such as PCT filing, international search, national phase entry, and maintenance. > - **Practical tips**: Offers specific advice for self-filing, such as using WIPO’s resources and researching national requirements. > - **Cost estimates**: Provides realistic cost ranges for PCT filing and national phase entry, which is helpful for planning. > - **Balanced approach**: Acknowledges the complexity of the process and recommends professional help for complex cases. > > **Weaknesses:** > - Slightly more technical than Response B, which might intimidate readers unfamiliar with patent terminology. > - Could include more examples of tools or platforms for self-filing. > > --- > > ### **Response D** > **Score: 8.5/10** > > **Strengths:** > - **Clear and concise**: Presents the information in a simple, easy-to-understand format. > - **Practical focus**: Emphasizes self-filing and provides actionable steps, such as preparing the PCT application and responding to office actions. > - **Useful tips**: Highlights the importance of translation, staying organized, and using WIPO’s resources. > - **Balanced advice**: Recommends consulting a lawyer for complex issues while encouraging self-filing. > > **Weaknesses:** > - Less detailed than Responses A and C, particularly in explaining the PCT process and national phase requirements. > - Does not provide cost estimates or specific tools for self-filing. > - Could better emphasize the complexity of international patent protection. > > --- > > ### **Final Ranking** > 1. **Response C (9.5/10)**: The most comprehensive, detailed, and practical response, with a clear structure and useful cost estimates. > 2. **Response A (9/10)**: Highly detailed and accurate, but slightly verbose and less focused on self-filing tools. > 3. **Response D (8.5/10)**: Clear and concise, with a practical focus, but lacks some depth and specific resources. > 4. **Response B (8/10)**: Simple and straightforward, but less comprehensive and detailed compared to the others. > > --- > > ### **Recommendation** > For someone seeking to protect their invention internationally, **Response C** is the best choice due to its balance of detail, clarity, and practical advice. However, **Response A** is also excellent for those who want a deeper understanding of the legal and procedural aspects. ### Qwen 2.5 Max (Response D) > Sure, let’s evaluate and score the responses based on several criteria: **Clarity**, **Completeness**, **Accuracy**, **Structure**, and **Usefulness**. Each criterion will be scored from 1 to 5, with 5 being the highest. > > ### Evaluation Criteria: > - **Clarity**: How clear and easy to understand is the response? > - **Completeness**: Does the response cover all necessary steps and considerations? > - **Accuracy**: Is the information provided accurate and correct? > - **Structure**: How well-organized and logical is the response? > - **Usefulness**: How helpful is the response for someone trying to navigate the international patent process? > > ### Response A > > - **Clarity**: 4 > - The response is generally clear but could benefit from more concise language in some sections. > - **Completeness**: 5 > - Covers all essential steps and considerations, including costs, deadlines, and resources. > - **Accuracy**: 5 > - Accurate information about the PCT, Paris Convention, and national phase entry. > - **Structure**: 4 > - Well-structured but could be slightly more streamlined. > - **Usefulness**: 5 > - Very useful with practical advice and important considerations. > > **Total Score**: 23/25 > > ### Response B > > - **Clarity**: 4 > - Clear and straightforward, though some sections could be more detailed. > - **Completeness**: 4 > - Covers most steps but lacks some details on costs and specific requirements. > - **Accuracy**: 5 > - Accurate information about the PCT process and deadlines. > - **Structure**: 4 > - Good structure but could be more consistent in formatting. > - **Usefulness**: 4 > - Useful but could provide more comprehensive guidance on specific steps. > > **Total Score**: 21/25 > > ### Response C > > - **Clarity**: 5 > - Very clear and easy to follow. > - **Completeness**: 5 > - Comprehensive coverage of all steps, including detailed sections on each phase. > - **Accuracy**: 5 > - Highly accurate with no apparent errors. > - **Structure**: 5 > - Excellent structure with clear headings and subheadings. > - **Usefulness**: 5 > - Extremely useful with practical tips and estimated costs. > > **Total Score**: 25/25 > > ### Response D > > - **Clarity**: 4 > - Clear but slightly repetitive in some areas. > - **Completeness**: 4 > - Covers most steps but could include more details on specific requirements and costs. > - **Accuracy**: 5 > - Accurate information with no significant errors. > - **Structure**: 4 > - Good structure but could be more consistent in formatting. > - **Usefulness**: 4 > - Useful but could provide more detailed guidance on certain steps. > > **Total Score**: 21/25 > > ### Summary > > - **Response A**: 23/25 > - **Response B**: 21/25 > - **Response C**: 25/25 > - **Response D**: 21/25 > > **Best Response**: **Response C** with a perfect score of 25/25 due to its clarity, completeness, accuracy, excellent structure, and high usefulness. ## Final Verdict: What Can We Infer About These Models? Each model has a distinct personality shaped by its design philosophy: - **Gemini** is the perfectionist, striving for absolute correctness but risking verbosity. - **ChatGPT** is the people pleaser, focusing on clarity and engagement but occasionally skimping on details. - **DeepSeek** is the strategist, balancing depth and accessibility with precision. - **Qwen** is the motivator, emphasizing simplicity and encouragement but lacking in nuance. For users navigating complex tasks like international patent protection, **DeepSeek (C)** emerges as the top choice due to its blend of structure, detail, and practicality. However, the ideal model ultimately depends on the user’s needs: - Go with **Gemini** if you want exhaustive detail. - Choose **ChatGPT** for a beginner-friendly overview. - Pick **DeepSeek** for a well-rounded, actionable guide. - Opt for **Qwen** if you prefer simple, encouraging advice.