Linyang Li

Yunfan Shao, Linyang Li, Yichuan Ma et al.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown outstanding breakthroughs in code generation. Recent work improves code LLMs by training on synthetic data generated by some powerful LLMs, which can be challenging to scale due to the dependence on a teacher model and high generation costs. In this paper, we focus on synthesizing code data at scale and propose a \textbf{Case2Code} task by exploiting the expressiveness and correctness of programs. \textbf{Case2Code} is an inductive inference task that aims to infer underlying code implementations by observing input-output examples or program behaviors, By incorporating LLMs to generate program inputs, and executing the program with these inputs to obtain the program outputs, we can synthesize diverse and high-quality \textbf{Case2Code} data at scale for training and evaluating code LLMs. Experimental results show that case-to-code induction is challenging for current representative LLMs if they are untrained. Models trained with \textbf{Case2Code} improve performance not only on distribution case-to-code induction but also on various coding-generation tasks, demonstrating the great potential of large-scale synthetic data and inductive learning.

Kedi Chen, Dezhao Ruan, Yuhao Dan et al.

Reasoning is an important task for large language models (LLMs). Among all the reasoning paradigms, inductive reasoning is one of the fundamental types, which is characterized by its particular-to-general thinking process and the non-uniqueness of its answers. The inductive mode is crucial for knowledge generalization and aligns better with human cognition, so it is a fundamental mode of learning, hence attracting increasing interest. Despite the importance of inductive reasoning, there is no systematic summary of it. Therefore, this paper presents the first comprehensive survey of inductive reasoning for LLMs. First, methods for improving inductive reasoning are categorized into three main areas: post-training, test-time scaling, and data augmentation. Then, current benchmarks of inductive reasoning are summarized, and a unified sandbox-based evaluation approach with the observation coverage metric is derived. Finally, we offer some analyses regarding the source of inductive ability and how simple model architectures and data help with inductive tasks, providing a solid foundation for future research.

Zhikai Lei, Tianyi Liang, Hanglei Hu et al.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are commonly evaluated using human-crafted benchmarks, under the premise that higher scores implicitly reflect stronger human-like performance. However, there is growing concern that LLMs may ``game" these benchmarks due to data leakage, achieving high scores while struggling with tasks simple for humans. To substantively address the problem, we create GAOKAO-Eval, a comprehensive benchmark based on China's National College Entrance Examination (Gaokao), and conduct ``closed-book" evaluations for representative models released prior to Gaokao. Contrary to prevailing consensus, even after addressing data leakage and comprehensiveness, GAOKAO-Eval reveals that high scores still fail to truly reflect human-aligned capabilities. To better understand this mismatch, We introduce the Rasch model from cognitive psychology to analyze LLM scoring patterns and identify two key discrepancies: 1) anomalous consistent performance across various question difficulties, and 2) high variance in performance on questions of similar difficulty. In addition, We identified inconsistent grading of LLM-generated answers among teachers and recurring mistake patterns. we find that the phenomenons are well-grounded in the motivations behind OpenAI o1, and o1's reasoning-as-difficulties can mitigate the mismatch. These results show that GAOKAO-Eval can reveal limitations in LLM capabilities not captured by current benchmarks and highlight the need for more LLM-aligned difficulty analysis.