The Token Games: Evaluating Language Model Reasoning with Puzzle Duels
Evaluating the reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models is increasingly challenging as models improve. Human curation of hard questions is highly expensive, especially in recent benchmarks using PhD-level domain knowledge to challenge the most capable models. Even then, there is always a concern about whether these questions test genuine reasoning or if similar problems have been seen during training. Here, we take inspiration from 16th-century mathematical duels to design The Token Games (TTG): an evaluation framework where models challenge each other by creating their own puzzles. We leverage the format of Programming Puzzles - given a function that returns a boolean, find inputs that make it return True - to flexibly represent problems and enable verifying solutions. Using results from pairwise duels, we then compute Elo ratings, allowing us to compare models relative to each other. We evaluate 10 frontier models on TTG, and closely match the ranking from existing benchmarks such as Humanity's Last Exam, spending less than $200 USD and without involving any human effort in creating puzzles. We also find that creating good puzzles is still a highly challenging task for current models. Overall, our work suggests new paradigms for evaluating reasoning that avoid saturation by design, and that allow testing models for other skills like creativity and task creation alongside problem solving.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
PuzzleJAX: A Benchmark for Reasoning and Learning
We introduce PuzzleJAX, a GPU-accelerated puzzle game engine and description language designed to support rapid benchmarking of tree search, reinforcement learning, and LLM reasoning abilities. Unlike existing GPU-accele…
Reinforcement LearningChessArena: A Chess Testbed for Evaluating Strategic Reasoning Capabilities of Large Language Models
Recent large language models (LLMs) have shown strong reasoning capabilities. However, a critical question remains: do these models possess genuine strategic reasoning, or do they primarily excel at pattern recognition? …
Do Vision-Language-Models show human-like logical problem-solving capability in point and click puzzle games?
Vision-Language(-Action) Models (VLMs) are increasingly applied to interactive environments, yet existing benchmarks often overlook the complex physical reasoning required for point-and-click puzzle games. This paper int…
Logical ReasoningVisual GroundingHardcoreLogic: Challenging Large Reasoning Models with Long-tail Logic Puzzle Games
Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) have demonstrated impressive performance on complex tasks, including logical puzzle games that require deriving solutions satisfying all constraints. However, whether they can flexibly apply…
Logical ReasoningConnecting the Dots: Evaluating Abstract Reasoning Capabilities of LLMs Using the New York Times Connections Word Game
The New York Times Connections game has emerged as a popular and challenging pursuit for word puzzle enthusiasts. We collect 438 Connections games to evaluate the performance of state-of-the-art large language models (LL…