In your second approach, you write
$$\frac{\partial \beta}{\partial \left(\alpha \beta \gamma \right)} = \frac{\partial v_1}{\partial \left( v_0 v_2 \right)} = 0 \tag{1}\label{eq1}$$
This only works if $v_1$ doesn't change as $v_0 v_2$ does, which is what I believe you are assuming. However, since $v_0 v_2 = \alpha \beta \gamma$ and $v_1 = \beta$, the $2$ expressions are not generally independent of each other due to $\beta$ being in both expressions (note the exception is if $\alpha \gamma$ has a dependency on $\beta$ only as a fraction with a factor of $\beta$ in the denominator, but you say "as $\alpha$ and $\gamma$ do not depend on $\beta$", then this is not true). Thus, if for example, you change $v_0 v_2$ by changing $\beta$, then $v_1$ will be changing as well, so you cannot state that $v_1$ doesn't change at all while $v_0 v_2$ is changing, so this means that
$$\frac{\partial v_1}{\partial \left( v_0 v_2 \right)} \neq 0 \tag{2}\label{eq2}$$
More generally, note that expressing a value in a different way doesn't change any result, or other behavior, which uses that value. For example, $6 = 3 \times 2$, but $\frac{30}{6}$ and $\frac{30}{3 \times 2}$ are both equal to $5$. The important thing is what particular numeric values are being used, regardless of how they're represented. In this situation, expressing $\beta$ as $v_1$ and $\alpha \beta \gamma$ as $v_2$ doesn't change their numeric values, or relationship, at any point, so their extent of (in)dependence is still the same, and any partial derivatives involving them are also the same.
I hope that I've interpreted what you are doing correctly and that this addresses the issue.