LLM performance on harder problems versus prerequisite skills
Summarizing a paper comparing eight LLMs with more than 18,000 human learners, the user contrasts one model’s higher accuracy with humans’ greater consistency on prerequisite skills.
TLDR
According to a user’s summary of the paper, humans scored 79.6% overall, and 72.7% of their correct answers also had every tested prerequisite correct. QWEN3-80B-INSTRUCT scored higher at 92.5%, but met that prerequisite standard for only 48.16% of its correct answers. The user argues that high accuracy can hide disconnected pockets of knowledge and says the paper recommends evaluating reasoning models with connected sets of easy and hard problems, not isolated benchmark questions alone.
Combined views
6.3K
2 Sources, first seen 19d ago