OlympicArena: Benchmarking Multi-discipline Cognitive Reasoning for Superintelligent AI
read the original abstract
The evolution of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has been significantly accelerated by advancements in Large Language Models (LLMs) and Large Multimodal Models (LMMs), gradually showcasing potential cognitive reasoning abilities in problem-solving and scientific discovery (i.e., AI4Science) once exclusive to human intellect. To comprehensively evaluate current models' performance in cognitive reasoning abilities, we introduce OlympicArena, which includes 11,163 bilingual problems across both text-only and interleaved text-image modalities. These challenges encompass a wide range of disciplines spanning seven fields and 62 international Olympic competitions, rigorously examined for data leakage. We argue that the challenges in Olympic competition problems are ideal for evaluating AI's cognitive reasoning due to their complexity and interdisciplinary nature, which are essential for tackling complex scientific challenges and facilitating discoveries. Beyond evaluating performance across various disciplines using answer-only criteria, we conduct detailed experiments and analyses from multiple perspectives. We delve into the models' cognitive reasoning abilities, their performance across different modalities, and their outcomes in process-level evaluations, which are vital for tasks requiring complex reasoning with lengthy solutions. Our extensive evaluations reveal that even advanced models like GPT-4o only achieve a 39.97% overall accuracy, illustrating current AI limitations in complex reasoning and multimodal integration. Through the OlympicArena, we aim to advance AI towards superintelligence, equipping it to address more complex challenges in science and beyond. We also provide a comprehensive set of resources to support AI research, including a benchmark dataset, an open-source annotation platform, a detailed evaluation tool, and a leaderboard with automatic submission features.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet.
Forward citations
Cited by 7 Pith papers
-
DeepMath-103K: A Large-Scale, Challenging, Decontaminated, and Verifiable Mathematical Dataset for Advancing Reasoning
DeepMath-103K is a new 103K-problem mathematical dataset with high difficulty, rigorous decontamination, and verifiable answers to support RL training of language-model reasoning.
-
Omni-MATH: A Universal Olympiad Level Mathematic Benchmark For Large Language Models
Omni-MATH supplies 4428 human-verified Olympiad math problems that expose top LLMs achieving only 52.55% to 60.54% accuracy on the most difficult items.
-
Reasoning4Sciences: Bridging Reasoning Language Models to All Scientific Branches
Survey of RLM adoption in 28 disciplines reveals maturity disparities via a new assessment framework, with focus on development, evaluation, and public resources.
-
Reasoning4Sciences: Bridging Reasoning Language Models to All Scientific Branches
A survey of RLM use in 28 disciplines reveals uneven adoption and introduces a maturity assessment framework showing larger gaps when limited to public resources.
-
PRL-Bench: A Comprehensive Benchmark Evaluating LLMs' Capabilities in Frontier Physics Research
PRL-Bench evaluates frontier LLMs on 100 real physics research tasks and finds the best models score below 50, exposing a gap to autonomous discovery.
-
LIMO: Less is More for Reasoning
LIMO achieves 63.3% on AIME24 and 95.6% on MATH500 via supervised fine-tuning on roughly 1% of the data used by prior models, supporting the claim that minimal strategic examples suffice when pre-training has already ...
-
The Periodic Table of LLM Reasoning: A Structured Survey of Reasoning Paradigms, Methods, and Failure Modes
A literature survey that introduces a taxonomy for LLM reasoning paradigms, analyzes methodological trends, and synthesizes failure modes from over 300 papers.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.