LiveCodeBench Pro: How Do Olympiad Medalists Judge LLMs in Competitive Programming?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2506.11928v1
• Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2025 16:29:09 GMT
• Title: LiveCodeBench Pro: How Do Olympiad Medalists Judge LLMs in Competitive Programming?
• Authors: Zihan Zheng, Zerui Cheng, Zeyu Shen, Shang Zhou, Kaiyuan Liu, Hansen He, Dongruixuan Li, Stanley Wei, Hangyi Hao, Jianzhu Yao, Peiyao Sheng, Zixuan Wang, Wenhao Chai, Aleksandra Korolova, Peter Henderson, Sanjeev Arora, Pramod Viswanath, Jingbo Shang, Saining Xie,
• Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) now outperform elite humans in competitive programming.<n>We revisit this claim, examining how LLMs differ from human experts and where limitations still remain.<n>We introduce LiveCodeBench Pro, a benchmark composed of problems from Codeforces, ICPC, and IOI.<n>A team of Olympiad medalists annotates every problem for algorithmic categories and conducts a line-by-line analysis of failed model-generated submissions.
• Score: 88.29001498765629
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Recent reports claim that large language models (LLMs) now outperform elite humans in competitive programming. Drawing on knowledge from a group of medalists in international algorithmic contests, we revisit this claim, examining how LLMs differ from human experts and where limitations still remain. We introduce LiveCodeBench Pro, a benchmark composed of problems from Codeforces, ICPC, and IOI that are continuously updated to reduce the likelihood of data contamination. A team of Olympiad medalists annotates every problem for algorithmic categories and conducts a line-by-line analysis of failed model-generated submissions. Using this new data and benchmark, we find that frontier models still have significant limitations: without external tools, the best model achieves only 53% pass@1 on medium-difficulty problems and 0% on hard problems, domains where expert humans still excel. We also find that LLMs succeed at implementation-heavy problems but struggle with nuanced algorithmic reasoning and complex case analysis, often generating confidently incorrect justifications. High performance appears largely driven by implementation precision and tool augmentation, not superior reasoning. LiveCodeBench Pro thus highlights the significant gap to human grandmaster levels, while offering fine-grained diagnostics to steer future improvements in code-centric LLM reasoning.

Related papers

• WarriorMath: Enhancing the Mathematical Ability of Large Language Models with a Defect-aware Framework [42.74246647841103]
  WarriorMath is a defect-aware framework for mathematical problem solving.<n>We employ multiple expert LLMs in a collaborative process to generate, critique, and refine problems.<n>In the training stage, we introduce a progressive learning framework that iteratively fine-tunes the model using increasingly challenging data tailored to its weaknesses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-02T07:45:12Z)
• Humanity's Last Code Exam: Can Advanced LLMs Conquer Human's Hardest Code Competition? [39.99519977079694]
  Humanity's Last Code Exam (HLCE) comprises 235 most challenging problems from the International Collegiate Programming Contest (ICPC World Finals) and the International Olympiad in Informatics (IOI)<n>As part of HLCE, we design a harmonized online-offline sandbox that guarantees fully reproducible evaluation.<n>We observe that even the strongest reasoning LLMs: o4-mini(high) and Gemini-2.5 Pro, achieve pass@1 rates of only 15.9% and 11.4%, respectively.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-15T04:03:31Z)
• OIBench: Benchmarking Strong Reasoning Models with Olympiad in Informatics [13.049841309304922]
  This paper introduces OIBench, a high-quality, private, and challenging olympiad-level informatics dataset comprising 250 carefully curated original problems.<n>We detail the construction methodology of the benchmark, ensuring a comprehensive assessment across various programming paradigms and complexities.<n>We propose Time/Space Completion Curves for finer-grained efficiency analysis and enable direct human-model comparisons.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-12T08:33:38Z)
• Leveraging Online Olympiad-Level Math Problems for LLMs Training and Contamination-Resistant Evaluation [55.21013307734612]
  AoPS-Instruct is a dataset of more than 600,000 high-quality QA pairs.<n>LiveAoPSBench is an evolving evaluation set with timestamps, derived from the latest forum data.<n>Our work presents a scalable approach to creating and maintaining large-scale, high-quality datasets for advanced math reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-24T06:39:38Z)
• CodeElo: Benchmarking Competition-level Code Generation of LLMs with Human-comparable Elo Ratings [70.95565672516979]
  Existing benchmarks, like LiveCodeBench and USACO, fall short due to the unavailability of private test cases, lack of support for special judges, and misaligned execution environments.<n>CodeElo is a standardized competition-level code generation benchmark that effectively addresses all these challenges for the first time.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-02T13:49:00Z)
• WarriorCoder: Learning from Expert Battles to Augment Code Large Language Models [67.15146980023621]
  We propose WarriorCoder, a novel paradigm learns from expert battles to address limitations of current approaches.<n>We create an arena where leading expert code LLMs challenge each other, with evaluations conducted by impartial judges.<n>This competitive framework generates novel training data from scratch, leveraging the strengths of all participants.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-23T08:47:42Z)
• What's Wrong with Your Code Generated by Large Language Models? An Extensive Study [80.18342600996601]
  Large language models (LLMs) produce code that is shorter yet more complicated as compared to canonical solutions. We develop a taxonomy of bugs for incorrect codes that includes three categories and 12 sub-categories, and analyze the root cause for common bug types. We propose a novel training-free iterative method that introduces self-critique, enabling LLMs to critique and correct their generated code based on bug types and compiler feedback.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-08T17:27:17Z)
• LiveBench: A Challenging, Contamination-Limited LLM Benchmark [93.57775429120488]
  We release LiveBench, the first benchmark that contains frequently-updated questions from recent information sources.<n>We evaluate many prominent closed-source models, as well as dozens of open-source models ranging from 0.5B to 405B in size.<n>Questions are added and updated on a monthly basis, and we release new tasks and harder versions of tasks over time.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-27T16:47:42Z)
• Evaluating LLMs' Mathematical and Coding Competency through Ontology-guided Interventions [47.83142414018448]
  We focus on two popular reasoning tasks: arithmetic reasoning and code generation. We introduce (i) a general ontology of perturbations for math and coding questions, (ii) a semi-automatic method to apply these perturbations, and (iii) two datasets. We show a significant performance drop across all the models against perturbed questions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-17T18:13:07Z)
• Have LLMs Advanced Enough? A Challenging Problem Solving Benchmark For Large Language Models [23.344490944210456]
  We present 515Bench, a more challenging benchmark dataset for evaluating the problem solving abilities of large language models (LLMs) We curate challenging pre-engineering mathematics, physics and chemistry problems from the highly competitive IIT-Advanced exam. Our evaluation on various open-source and proprietary models reveals that the highest performance, even after using techniques like self-consistency, self-refinement and chain-of-thought prompting, is less than 40%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-24T11:55:59Z)

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.