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
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.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
LiveCodeBench Pro: How Do Olympiad Medalists Judge LLMs in Competitive Programming?
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.
-
Evaluating and Improving Large Language Models for Competitive Program Generation
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.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.