The Impossible Test: A 2024 Unsolvable Dataset and A Chance for an AGI Quiz
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2411.14486v1
- Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2024 04:12:29 GMT
- Title: The Impossible Test: A 2024 Unsolvable Dataset and A Chance for an AGI Quiz
- Authors: David Noever, Forrest McKee,
- Abstract summary: We evaluate large language models' (LLMs) ability to acknowledge uncertainty on 675 fundamentally unsolvable problems.
The best models scored in 62-68% accuracy ranges for admitting the problem solution was unknown in fields ranging from biology to philosophy and mathematics.
- Score: 0.0
- License:
- Abstract: This research introduces a novel evaluation framework designed to assess large language models' (LLMs) ability to acknowledge uncertainty on 675 fundamentally unsolvable problems. Using a curated dataset of graduate-level grand challenge questions with intentionally unknowable answers, we evaluated twelve state-of-the-art LLMs, including both open and closed-source models, on their propensity to admit ignorance rather than generate plausible but incorrect responses. The best models scored in 62-68% accuracy ranges for admitting the problem solution was unknown in fields ranging from biology to philosophy and mathematics. We observed an inverse relationship between problem difficulty and model accuracy, with GPT-4 demonstrating higher rates of uncertainty acknowledgment on more challenging problems (35.8%) compared to simpler ones (20.0%). This pattern indicates that models may be more prone to generate speculative answers when problems appear more tractable. The study also revealed significant variations across problem categories, with models showing difficulty in acknowledging uncertainty in invention and NP-hard problems while performing relatively better on philosophical and psychological challenges. These results contribute to the growing body of research on artificial general intelligence (AGI) assessment by highlighting the importance of uncertainty recognition as a critical component of future machine intelligence evaluation. This impossibility test thus extends previous theoretical frameworks for universal intelligence testing by providing empirical evidence of current limitations in LLMs' ability to recognize their own knowledge boundaries, suggesting new directions for improving model training architectures and evaluation approaches.
Related papers
- Large Language Models and Mathematical Reasoning Failures [1.6114012813668932]
This paper investigates the mathematical reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs) using 50 newly constructed high-school-level word problems.
We rigorously analyze both final answers and solution steps to identify reasoning failures.
We find that while newer models (e.g., o3-mini, deepseek-r1) achieve higher accuracy, all models exhibit errors in spatial reasoning, strategic planning, and arithmetic.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-02-17T09:07:32Z) - Causality can systematically address the monsters under the bench(marks) [64.36592889550431]
Benchmarks are plagued by various biases, artifacts, or leakage.
Models may behave unreliably due to poorly explored failure modes.
causality offers an ideal framework to systematically address these challenges.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-02-07T17:01:37Z) - A Comprehensive Evaluation of Large Language Models on Mental Illnesses [0.8458496687170665]
GPT-4 and Llama 3 exhibited superior performance in binary disorder detection, with accuracies reaching up to 85% on certain datasets.
prompt engineering played a crucial role in enhancing model performance.
Despite promising results, our analysis identified several challenges, including variability in performance across datasets and the need for careful prompt engineering.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-09-24T02:58:52Z) - MR-Ben: A Meta-Reasoning Benchmark for Evaluating System-2 Thinking in LLMs [55.20845457594977]
Large language models (LLMs) have shown increasing capability in problem-solving and decision-making.
We present a process-based benchmark MR-Ben that demands a meta-reasoning skill.
Our meta-reasoning paradigm is especially suited for system-2 slow thinking.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-06-20T03:50:23Z) - OlympicArena: Benchmarking Multi-discipline Cognitive Reasoning for Superintelligent AI [73.75520820608232]
We introduce OlympicArena, which includes 11,163 bilingual problems across both text-only and interleaved text-image modalities.
These challenges encompass a wide range of disciplines spanning seven fields and 62 international Olympic competitions, rigorously examined for data leakage.
Our evaluations reveal that even advanced models like GPT-4o only achieve a 39.97% overall accuracy, illustrating current AI limitations in complex reasoning and multimodal integration.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-06-18T16:20:53Z) - VC Search: Bridging the Gap Between Well-Defined and Ill-Defined Problems in Mathematical Reasoning [46.25056744404318]
We develop a benchmark called Problems with Missing and Contradictory conditions ( PMC) containing over 5,000 validated ill-defined mathematical problems.
VCSEARCH improves the accuracy of identifying unsolvable problems by at least 12% across different large language models.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-06-07T16:24:12Z) - Competition-Level Problems are Effective LLM Evaluators [121.15880285283116]
This paper aims to evaluate the reasoning capacities of large language models (LLMs) in solving recent programming problems in Codeforces.
We first provide a comprehensive evaluation of GPT-4's peiceived zero-shot performance on this task, considering various aspects such as problems' release time, difficulties, and types of errors encountered.
Surprisingly, theThoughtived performance of GPT-4 has experienced a cliff like decline in problems after September 2021 consistently across all the difficulties and types of problems.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-12-04T18:58:57Z) - Improving the Reliability of Large Language Models by Leveraging
Uncertainty-Aware In-Context Learning [76.98542249776257]
Large-scale language models often face the challenge of "hallucination"
We introduce an uncertainty-aware in-context learning framework to empower the model to enhance or reject its output in response to uncertainty.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-07T12:06:53Z)
This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.
This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.