Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Communicating Natural Programs to Humans and Machines

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 2106.07824 v4 pith:YJTP3DAG submitted 2021-06-15 cs.AI

Communicating Natural Programs to Humans and Machines

classification cs.AI
keywords theylanguagetaskshumansinstructionsnaturalprogramswhile
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

The Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus (ARC) is a set of procedural tasks that tests an agent's ability to flexibly solve novel problems. While most ARC tasks are easy for humans, they are challenging for state-of-the-art AI. What makes building intelligent systems that can generalize to novel situations such as ARC difficult? We posit that the answer might be found by studying the difference of \emph{language}: While humans readily generate and interpret instructions in a general language, computer systems are shackled to a narrow domain-specific language that they can precisely execute. We present LARC, the \textit{Language-complete ARC}: a collection of natural language descriptions by a group of human participants who instruct each other on how to solve ARC tasks using language alone, which contains successful instructions for 88\% of the ARC tasks. We analyze the collected instructions as `natural programs', finding that while they resemble computer programs, they are distinct in two ways: First, they contain a wide range of primitives; Second, they frequently leverage communicative strategies beyond directly executable codes. We demonstrate that these two distinctions prevent current program synthesis techniques from leveraging LARC to its full potential, and give concrete suggestions on how to build the next-generation program synthesizers.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Cost-Effective Agent Harnesses for Abstract Reasoning and Generalization on ARC-AGI-1

    cs.AI 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0

    Explorer-Definer and Reflective Orchestrator harnesses raise DeepSeek V3.2 from 15.5% to 67.25% pass@2 on ARC-AGI-1 public eval at $0.25–$0.62 per task without ARC-specific training.