Live data from Hacker News

Day 1 of ARC-AGI-3

symbolica.ai

51–60 of 79 posts

Re: Day 1 of ARC-AGI-3

#51

The fact that this was on the set of training problems with a custom harness basically makes the headline a lie. What if you give opus the same harness? Do people even care about meaningful comparisons any more or is it all just “numbers go up”

Would the single sentence „Imagine you are a regular computer player and accustomed to the usual elements of games“ count as a harness?

Re: Day 1 of ARC-AGI-3

#52
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Benchmarks on public tests are too easy to game. The model owners can just incorporate the answers in to the dataset. Only the private problems actually matter.

In this case the code is public and you can see they are not cheating in that sense.

They are definitely cheating, they have crafted prompts[1] that explain the game rules rather than have the model explore and learn.

1. https://github.com/symbolica-ai/ARC-AGI-3-Agents/blob/symbol...

Re: Day 1 of ARC-AGI-3

#53
Apparently the score would be a little higher if it weren't for the fact that scores are penalized for being worse than the human baseline, but aren't rewarded for being better than the human baseline (which seems like an arbitrary decision. The human baseline is not optimal).

Re: Day 1 of ARC-AGI-3

#54
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're calling agents harnesses now?

The point of this test is to check if an AI system can figure out the game. This isn't what happened here. A human figured out the game, wrote in their prompts exactly how the game works and THEN put the AI on the problem. This is 100% cheating and imo quite stupid.

The harness would be fine if the agent coded its own harness in a controlled environment while observing the game.

Not sure if the specific rules of this prize allow that, but I would accept that

Re: Day 1 of ARC-AGI-3

#55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It isn't arbitrary. They want measure the capability of the general LLM

So if I say "I want to measure your capability as a mechanic" but then also "to ensure an accurate score you're forbidden to use any tools" how are you the human mechanic planning to diagnose and fix the engine problem without wrenches and jack stands and the like? It makes no sense. That said their harness isn't generic. It includes a ridiculously detailed prompt for how to play this specific game. Forbidding tool u…

It is more like restricting the mechanic to only using commercially available tools and not allow them to create CUSTOM tools.

Re: Day 1 of ARC-AGI-3

#56

we constantly underestimate the power of inference scaffolding. I have seen it in all domains: coding, ASR, ARC-AGI benchmarks you name it. Scaffolding can do a lot! And post-training too. I am confident our currently pre-trained models can beat this benchmark over 80% with the right post-training and scaffolding. That being said I don't think ARC-AGI proves much. It is not a useful task at all in the wild. it is jus…

That's unsurprising given that a lot of our own abilities as humans come from having painstakingly acquired practices and methodologies and tools (like pencil and paper, note taking, let alone algebra, formal methods and electromechanical aids). We call this "education" but it works in a way that is more similar to agentic harnesses than to pretraining or fine-tuning. This is reflected in the fundamental different way in which children and adults learn new skills

Re: Day 1 of ARC-AGI-3

#57

we constantly underestimate the power of inference scaffolding. I have seen it in all domains: coding, ASR, ARC-AGI benchmarks you name it. Scaffolding can do a lot! And post-training too. I am confident our currently pre-trained models can beat this benchmark over 80% with the right post-training and scaffolding. That being said I don't think ARC-AGI proves much. It is not a useful task at all in the wild. it is jus…

Scaffolding is all you need. I am absolutely certain about that. It's abound finding good ways to approximate the reward function being used during post-training, but at inference time. A general enough reward that can score candidates well will inevitably improve the abilities of LLMs when put inside scaffolds.

Re: Day 1 of ARC-AGI-3

#58
post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what exactly does scaffolding mean in this context? genuine question

anything that doesn't touch the model parameters at all once it has been compiled. for example, in streaming ASR of an encoder-decoder you can get gains in accuracy just by enhancing the encoder-decoder orchestration and ratio, frequency of fwd passes, dynamically adjusting the length of rolling windows (if using full attention). Prompting would be part of this too, including few-shot examples. Decoding strategy is a…

Also think about the program-synthesis approach proposed by Poetiq.ai. python programs are being generated and evaluated against previous examples. Then in-context learning is done programmatically via prompt concatenation. If you can "score" online the working and non working examples, then you have a very strong reward signal.

Re: Day 1 of ARC-AGI-3

#59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So if I say "I want to measure your capability as a mechanic" but then also "to ensure an accurate score you're forbidden to use any tools" how are you the human mechanic planning to diagnose and fix the engine problem without wrenches and jack stands and the like? It makes no sense. That said their harness isn't generic. It includes a ridiculously detailed prompt for how to play this specific game. Forbidding tool u…

It is more like restricting the mechanic to only using commercially available tools and not allow them to create CUSTOM tools.

No, that would be analogous to disallowing customized harnesses, ie tooling specially crafted by someone else for the specific task at hand. Insisting that an LLM solve something without the ability to make use of any external tooling whatsoever is almost perfectly analogous to insisting that a human mechanic work on a car with nothing but his own bare hands.

The wrench is to the mechanic as the stock python repl is to the LLM.

Re: Day 1 of ARC-AGI-3

#60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is more like restricting the mechanic to only using commercially available tools and not allow them to create CUSTOM tools.

No, that would be analogous to disallowing customized harnesses, ie tooling specially crafted by someone else for the specific task at hand. Insisting that an LLM solve something without the ability to make use of any external tooling whatsoever is almost perfectly analogous to insisting that a human mechanic work on a car with nothing but his own bare hands. The wrench is to the mechanic as the stock python repl is…

They want the LLM that does the ARC-AGI-3 to be the same LLM that everyone uses.
Post reply on HN