Zexing Chen

Qiuyang Mang, Wenhao Chai, Zhifei Li et al.

We introduce FrontierCS, a benchmark of 156 open-ended problems across diverse areas of computer science, designed and reviewed by experts, including CS PhDs and top-tier competitive programming participants and problem setters. Unlike existing benchmarks that focus on tasks with known optimal solutions, FrontierCS targets problems where the optimal solution is unknown, but the quality of a solution can be objectively evaluated. Models solve these tasks by implementing executable programs rather than outputting a direct answer. FrontierCS includes algorithmic problems, which are often NP-hard variants of competitive programming problems with objective partial scoring, and research problems with the same property. For each problem we provide an expert reference solution and an automatic evaluator. Combining open-ended design, measurable progress, and expert curation, FrontierCS provides a benchmark at the frontier of computer-science difficulty. Empirically, we find that frontier reasoning models still lag far behind human experts on both the algorithmic and research tracks, that increasing reasoning budgets alone does not close this gap, and that models often over-optimize for generating merely workable code instead of discovering high-quality algorithms and system designs.

Han Meng, Xiaosong He, Zexing Chen et al.

Some Natural Language Generation (NLG) tasks require both faithfulness and diversity. The decoding strategy is intensively related to the quality of the generated text. Strategies such as beam search, greedy search, etc., perform with low diversity and high repetition. On the other hand, guided decoding, the solution towards diversity, may generate unfaithful expressions. To this end, this paper presents Information Filter upon Diversity-Improved Decoding (IFDID) to obtain the tradeoff between diversity and faithfulness. IFDID is a two-stage decoding strategy leveraging the proposed Enhance-Filter framework, which achieves the tradeoff by increasing the probabilities of some typical tokens being selected and subsequently filtering them by their information amount. To verify the effectiveness, we compare our method with other baselines on related CommonGEN, RocStories and AdGen benchmarks, which cover Chinese and English datasets. Our numerical experimental results and human evaluation outcomes verify the effectiveness of the proposed approach, as our approach achieves a 1.24 higher ROUGE score describing faithfulness as well as higher diversity represented by 62.5% higher upon Dist-2 than traditional approaches, demonstrating that IFDID is a novel SOTA decoding strategy for the tradeoff between diversity and faithfulness.

Shang Zhou, Zihan Zheng, Kaiyuan Liu et al.

Writing competitive programming problems is exacting. Authors must: set constraints, input distributions, and edge cases that rule out shortcuts; target specific algorithms (e.g., max-flow, dynamic programming, data structures); and calibrate complexity beyond the reach of most competitors. We argue that this makes for an ideal test of general large language model capabilities and study whether they can do this reliably. We introduce AutoCode, which uses multiple rounds of validation to yield competition-grade problem statements and test cases. On held-out problems, AutoCode test suites approach 99% consistency with official judgments, a significant improvement over current state-of-the-art methods like HardTests, which achieve less than 81%. Furthermore, starting with a random seed problem, AutoCode can create novel variants with reference and brute-force solutions. By cross-verifying these generated solutions against test cases, we can further filter out malformed problems. Our system ensures high correctness, as verified by human experts. AutoCode successfully produces novel problems judged by Grandmaster-level (top 0.3%) competitive programmers to be of contest quality.