Live data from Hacker News

SWE-bench Verified no longer measures frontier coding capabilities

openai.com

121–130 of 209 posts

Re: SWE-bench Verified no longer measures frontier coding capabilities

#121
post #68

Why don't they ask their premier model to generate a bench for them? Jokes aside, a benchmark I look forward to is ARC-AGI-3. I tried out their human simulation, and it feels very reasoning heavy. Leaderboard: https://arcprize.org/leaderboard (Most premier models don't even pass 5 percent.)

Can AI write a problem so difficult that even AI cannot solve? Hehe

How about prime factorization

Re: SWE-bench Verified no longer measures frontier coding capabilities

#122
post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why I made Zork bench. Zork, the text adventure game, is in the training data for LLMs. It’s also deterministic. Therefore it should be easy for an LLM to play and complete. Yet they don’t. Understanding why is the goal of Zork bench. https://github.com/mnky9800n/zork-bench

I have worked on similar problems. See e.g. [1]. The LLMs I have tested have terrible world models and intuitions for how actions change the environment. They're also not great at discerning and pursuing the right goals. They're like an infinitely patient five-year old with amazing vocabulary. [1]: https://entropicthoughts.com/updated-llm-benchmark (more descriptions available in earlier evaluations referenced from t…

You can code your prompts to read and write an external world model on the side. This is what most people do who are seriously doing games with LLMs.

Re: SWE-bench Verified no longer measures frontier coding capabilities

#123

I'm a co-creator of SWE-bench: 1. SWE-bench Verified is now saturated at 93.9% (congrats Anthropic), but anyone who hasn't reached that number yet still has more room for growth. 2. SWE-bench Multilingual and SWE-bench Multimodal (which we'll open source in the next month) are still unsatured. 3. All benchmarks and benchmark paradigms eventually become saturated. That's why the SWE-bench team has worked hard on build…

[dead]

Re: SWE-bench Verified no longer measures frontier coding capabilities

#124

Its pretty clear that any benchmark that comes out will be outdated and exist within the training data with short measure. There will always be an incentive to optimize specifically for these benchmarks even if just for marketing material. Sure there is a training cutoff, but its usually only 3-6 months off of the public release dates. The problem with coding benchmarks then becomes creating novel benchmarks that are…

This is why I made Zork bench. Zork, the text adventure game, is in the training data for LLMs. It’s also deterministic. Therefore it should be easy for an LLM to play and complete. Yet they don’t. Understanding why is the goal of Zork bench. https://github.com/mnky9800n/zork-bench

[dead]

Re: SWE-bench Verified no longer measures frontier coding capabilities

#125
post #84

This is somewhat tangential, but I want a model that can detect physical objects placed on top of a board from a picture/video, specifically warhammer 40k models. I want a model that can detect the actual units/models that are placed on top of the terrain/board so I can track how the models move during the game, but trying gemini and chatgpt they were absolutely rubbish.

Amiibo and Skylanders detect the pieces with NFC. Wiring up the whole board/ terrain with NFC readers would probably be difficult, though.

The other classic approach has been a single camera under the table, but that conflicts with terrain use. mmWave radar is probably good enough for to localization at this point, and cheap, but distinguishing pieces is hard.

Re: SWE-bench Verified no longer measures frontier coding capabilities

#126

I think an Olympiad format is better. But the financial incentive is such that it might be near impossible to stop leaks. I.e. A panel comes up with a series of problems. Like advent of code or project Euler but more complex and constricted. Benchmark outcomes could be performance points and measure of cost, time to solution (well token count really). A couple times per year it's run. It avoids overfitting. Overtime…

SWE-bench was created to replace olympiad coding benchmarks. I think past olympiad coding benchmarks were much worse representative of real-world coding than something like SWE-bench, which is derived from real units of labor. Further, olympiad style benchmarks are arguably easier to contaminate / memorize unless you refresh it regularly; but that goes for SWE-bench too.

I was picturing one-shot performance only for the benchmark, on novel real world tasks. I.e. the score on the March Olympiad you got in April isn't relevant.

Simple enough that anyone could run it with a regular subscription.

Really unless we can get the providers to ditch the gameable benchmarks they won't.

But industries love nothing more than a benchmark they can manipulate.

Re: SWE-bench Verified no longer measures frontier coding capabilities

#130

I'm a co-creator of SWE-bench: 1. SWE-bench Verified is now saturated at 93.9% (congrats Anthropic), but anyone who hasn't reached that number yet still has more room for growth. 2. SWE-bench Multilingual and SWE-bench Multimodal (which we'll open source in the next month) are still unsatured. 3. All benchmarks and benchmark paradigms eventually become saturated. That's why the SWE-bench team has worked hard on build…

> 1. SWE-bench Verified is now saturated at 93.9% (congrats Anthropic), but anyone who hasn't reached that number yet still has more room for growth.

But if some or all players are bench-maxing it, then it becomes a much less useful metric for comparison.

Also, this doesn't address what OpenAI says about the test suite disallowing valid solutions.

Post reply on HN