Pith. sign in

REVIEW 10 cited by

Can Language Models Solve Olympiad Programming?

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 2404.10952 v1 pith:X76Q4CXB submitted 2024-04-16 cs.CL cs.AIcs.PL

classification cs.CLcs.AIcs.PL
keywords benchmarkproblemsalgorithmiccodecomputingenablefindgpt-4
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Computing olympiads contain some of the most challenging problems for humans, requiring complex algorithmic reasoning, puzzle solving, in addition to generating efficient code. However, it has been understudied as a domain to evaluate language models (LMs). In this paper, we introduce the USACO benchmark with 307 problems from the USA Computing Olympiad, along with high-quality unit tests, reference code, and official analyses for each problem. These resources enable us to construct and test a range of LM inference methods for competitive programming for the first time. We find GPT-4 only achieves a 8.7% pass@1 accuracy with zero-shot chain-of-thought prompting, and our best inference method improves it to 20.2% using a combination of self-reflection and retrieval over episodic knowledge. However, this is far from solving the benchmark. To better understand the remaining challenges, we design a novel human-in-the-loop study and surprisingly find that a small number of targeted hints enable GPT-4 to solve 13 out of 15 problems previously unsolvable by any model and method. Our benchmark, baseline methods, quantitative results, and qualitative analysis serve as an initial step toward LMs with grounded, creative, and algorithmic reasoning.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 10 Pith papers

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

  1. KernelBench: Can LLMs Write Efficient GPU Kernels?

    cs.LG 2025-02 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

    KernelBench shows that even the best current LLMs generate correct and faster-than-baseline GPU kernels in fewer than 20 percent of realistic ML workloads.

  2. From Execution to Education: A Bloom-Aligned Framework for Measuring Educational Control in LLMs

    cs.CL 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.5 of 10

    On 2,520 programming tasks, matched Qwen general and coder models reliably raise Bloom cognitive demand but fail to lower it, so execution skill does not imply educational control.

  3. Teaching LLMs to Self-Evolve: Cultivating Core Meta-Skills with Reinforcement Learning

    cs.LG 2026-07 reject novelty 6.0 of 10

    MetaEvolve trains LLMs with reinforcement learning on synthesized code-refinement trajectories, reporting large gains on coding and numerical-optimization benchmarks.

  4. Solvita: Enhancing Large Language Models for Competitive Programming via Agentic Evolution

    cs.AI 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    Solvita is an agentic evolution system using Planner, Solver, Oracle, and Hacker agents with trainable graph knowledge networks updated by reinforcement learning on pass/fail and vulnerability signals to achieve SOTA ...

  5. Conversation for Non-verifiable Learning: Self-Evolving LLMs through Meta-Evaluation

    cs.CL 2026-01 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    CoNL lets LLMs self-improve on non-verifiable tasks by rewarding critiques that produce better solutions in multi-agent conversations, jointly optimizing generation and judging without external feedback.

  6. Efficiency of turbulence

    physics.flu-dyn 2025-08 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    The efficiency of turbulence, the fraction of input energy stored in the flow, appears bounded and may saturate in a power-law manner across several turbulent flows.

  7. DeepSeek-Coder-V2: Breaking the Barrier of Closed-Source Models in Code Intelligence

    cs.SE 2024-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    An open-source MoE code model matches GPT-4 Turbo on coding and math benchmarks while expanding to 338 languages and 128K context length.

  8. CodeGolf Bench: A Multi-Language Benchmark for Evaluating Concise Code Generation Capabilities of Large Language Models

    cs.SE 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

    CodeGolf Bench is a dynamic benchmark for LLM concise code generation in 60 languages, showing reasoning models reach 70.97% average human percentile on Python and C++ tasks while non-reasoning models lag.

  9. AgentCrypt: Advancing Privacy and (Secure) Computation in AI Agent Collaboration

    cs.CR 2025-12 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

    AgentCrypt introduces a deterministic three-tier privacy framework for AI agent collaboration that uses masking and homomorphic encryption to protect data independently of model accuracy.

  10. Secure Code Generation at Scale with Reflexion

    cs.CR 2025-11 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Three-round reflexion prompting raises LLM-generated code security from 70.74% to 79.43% as measured by the ICD static detector on the Instruct Prime benchmark.

Pith tools