Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Competition-Level Problems are Effective LLM Evaluators

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2312.02143 v3 pith:G3YE7KHL submitted 2023-12-04 cs.CL cs.AI

classification cs.CLcs.AI
keywords problemsreasoningllmsdataabilitiescapabilitieschallengescompetition-level
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive reasoning capabilities, yet there is ongoing debate about these abilities and the potential data contamination problem recently. This paper aims to evaluate the reasoning capacities of LLMs, specifically in solving recent competition-level programming problems in Codeforces, which are expert-crafted and unique, requiring deep understanding and robust reasoning skills. We first provide a comprehensive evaluation of GPT-4's peiceived zero-shot performance on this task, considering various aspects such as problems' release time, difficulties, and types of errors encountered. Surprisingly, the peiceived performance of GPT-4 has experienced a cliff like decline in problems after September 2021 consistently across all the difficulties and types of problems, which shows the potential data contamination, as well as the challenges for any existing LLM to solve unseen complex reasoning problems. We further explore various approaches such as fine-tuning, Chain-of-Thought prompting and problem description simplification, unfortunately none of them is able to consistently mitigate the challenges. Through our work, we emphasis the importance of this excellent data source for assessing the genuine reasoning capabilities of LLMs, and foster the development of LLMs with stronger reasoning abilities and better generalization in the future.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. LiveCodeBench Pro: How Do Olympiad Medalists Judge LLMs in Competitive Programming?

    cs.SE 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A live, medalist-annotated competitive programming benchmark finds frontier LLMs solve 53% of medium and 0% of hard problems without tools, and succeed mainly on implementation-heavy tasks.

  2. Evaluating and Improving Large Language Models for Competitive Program Generation

    cs.SI 2025-06 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    DeepSeek-R1 solves only 5 of 80 recent ICPC/CCPC competitive programming problems with a basic prompt, and 46 of 80 after a taxonomy-guided repair and regeneration pipeline.

Pith tools