arXiv AI By Timoth\'ee Lesort, Alejandra L\'opez de Aberasturi G\'omez, Tristan Karch, Tom Veniat, Philippe Modard, Karl Tuyls, Ludovic Denoyer

Benchmarking Prompt Optimization of Large Language Models With Chess

Read the original on arXiv AI →

arXiv:2610. 00416v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Evaluating large language models becomes increasingly challenging as their capabilities advance: benchmarks can saturate, public test sets risk contamination, and assessing harder tasks can require expensive grading or execution infrastructure.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.

arXiv AI
Jul 29

DecoEvo: Score-Decoupled Co-Evolution of Solver and Rubric-Generator Skills in Text Space

arXiv:2607. 25675v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Text-space optimization adapts large language models (LLMs) by editing external natural-language artifacts rather than model weights, so the optimized artifacts remain inspectable and the model can be treated as a black box.

By Jiangwang Chen, Zixin Song, Junlin Liu, Shuaiyu Zhou, Haiyan Wu, Haihan Shi, Chenxi Zhou, Hanqing Li, Xiao Yang, Da Zhu, Guanjun Jiang, Hai Wan, Xibin Zhao
arXiv AI
Sep 17

WordPolo: Evaluating Language Models Through Iterative Semantic Feedback

WordPolo is a word‑finding task that evaluates language models by having them guess an unknown target word and receive semantic similarity feedback. Participants start with no knowledge, make iterative guesses, and receive distance scores that guide them through semantic space. The study tests recent LLMs, LRMs, humans, and a heuristic on 1,500 puzzles, revealing that while solve rates vary widely, many models make meaningful progress and exhibit human‑like strategies, highlighting the importance of assessing reasoning processes, not just final accuracy.

By Tyler McDonald, Ali Emami
arXiv Machine Learning
Jun 2

ATLAS: Agentic Test-time Learning-to-Allocate Scaling

arXiv:2606. 01667v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Test-time scaling has become a major way to improve large language model reasoning, but its orchestration has remained designer-engineered: a fixed sample budget, a fixed refinement loop, a fixed scoring rule, or a fixed search policy decides how compute is spent, leaving the model in charge of solving but not of orchestration.

By Peijia Qin, Qi Cao, Pengtao Xie
arXiv Machine Learning
1d ago

How Much Can Language Models Gain from Test-Time Computation?

The paper investigates how test‑time computation can enhance language models and at what cost, introducing the SELF‑POT benchmark to evaluate this across competition mathematics, competitive programming, and agentic workflows. SELF‑POT separates candidate coverage from final accuracy, tracks correctness transitions under revision, and measures protocol completion alongside task success. Using a unified budget rule, the study compares direct inference, parallel sampling, and self‑revision across five low‑cost reasoning models, revealing that selection rules and failure handling significantly influence gains and cost savings.

By Bangji Yang, Jingyuan Li, Jiajun Fan, Yi Evie Zhang, Ruihan Guo, Hongba Ma, Neil He, Chumeng Liang, Qinglong Zheng, Zhanghan Ni, Ge Liu