CANLI
xAI, Imagine API’yi 2.0’a Yükseltmeye Hazırlanıyor: Görüntü ve Video Tek…·Microsoft MAI-Cyber-1-Flash’ı Duyurdu·Moonshot AI, Kimi K3 Model Ağırlıklarını ve Teknik Raporunu Açık…
12 Nov 2026 · 21:24 GMT+3
Ai Haber – Türkiyenin Yapay Zeka Haber Portalı
ARAşTıRMA · DOğAL DIL İşLEME arXiv:2610.30103 21 Eki 2026 · v1

Did the Problem Actually Get Harder? Testing LLMs on Paired P and NP-Complete Problems Hardened by Adversarial Multi-Agent Rewriting

Nurul Labib Sayeedi, Md. Faiyaz Abdullah Sayeedi, Zabir Al Nazi, Mahbub E Sobhani, Shubhashis Roy Dipta

YAYIN:21 Eki 2026 ALAN:cs.CL OKUMA:10

Özet

Many NP-complete (NPC) problems have a polynomial-time (P) twin that differs in a single structural detail, such as 3- versus 2-colouring a graph. A model that reasons rather than recalls should notice which side of this boundary a problem falls on, yet existing benchmarks either fix the wording of each task or ignore its complexity class, so they cannot separate the two. We introduce P2NPCBench, a benchmark of 12 problem families in which every NPC problem is paired with a P twin posed over the same surface. To remove the textbook cues that enable recall, we build it with AgentGAN, an adversarial multi-agent framework in which a generator rewrites each statement until a panel of frozen code models fails, while an executable validity gate keeps every rewrite answer- and class-preserving. The result is 2,114 hardened statements with hand-verified reference human solvers. Evaluating 12 proprietary and open-source models, we find that every model scores lower on NPC statements than on their P twins (35.4% vs. 63.8% pass@1), and that 95.1% of model-family pairs fail more often on the NPC side. A tenfold time limit raises NPC accuracy only from 28.5% to 31.9%, so failures stem from wrong or crashing programs rather than slow ones. Hardening also narrows the class gap from 24.8 to 14.6 points, showing that part of the apparent gap reflects familiarity with textbook phrasing rather than complexity class.

Özetle: Many NP-complete (NPC) problems have a polynomial-time (P) twin that differs in a single structural detail, such as 3- versus 2-colouring a graph.

Özet

Many NP-complete (NPC) problems have a polynomial-time (P) twin that differs in a single structural detail, such as 3- versus 2-colouring a graph. A model that reasons rather than recalls should notice which side of this boundary a problem falls on, yet existing benchmarks either fix the wording of each task or ignore its complexity class, so they cannot separate the two. We introduce P2NPCBench, a benchmark of 12 problem families in which every NPC problem is paired with a P twin posed over the same surface. To remove the textbook cues that enable recall, we build it with AgentGAN, an adversarial multi-agent framework in which a generator rewrites each statement until a panel of frozen code models fails, while an executable validity gate keeps every rewrite answer- and class-preserving. The result is 2,114 hardened statements with hand-verified reference human solvers. Evaluating 12 proprietary and open-source models, we find that every model scores lower on NPC statements than on their P twins (35.4% vs. 63.8% pass@1), and that 95.1% of model-family pairs fail more often on the NPC side. A tenfold time limit raises NPC accuracy only from 28.5% to 31.9%, so failures stem from wrong or crashing programs rather than slow ones. Hardening also narrows the class gap from 24.8 to 14.6 points, showing that part of the apparent gap reflects familiarity with textbook phrasing rather than complexity class.

Orijinal Özet (İngilizce)

Many NP-complete (NPC) problems have a polynomial-time (P) twin that differs in a single structural detail, such as 3- versus 2-colouring a graph. A model that reasons rather than recalls should notice which side of this boundary a problem falls on, yet existing benchmarks either fix the wording of each task or ignore its complexity class, so they cannot separate the two. We introduce P2NPCBench, a benchmark of 12 problem families in which every NPC problem is paired with a P twin posed over the same surface. To remove the textbook cues that enable recall, we build it with AgentGAN, an adversarial multi-agent framework in which a generator rewrites each statement until a panel of frozen code models fails, while an executable validity gate keeps every rewrite answer- and class-preserving. The result is 2,114 hardened statements with hand-verified reference human solvers. Evaluating 12 proprietary and open-source models, we find that every model scores lower on NPC statements than on their P twins (35.4% vs. 63.8% pass@1), and that 95.1% of model-family pairs fail more often on the NPC side. A tenfold time limit raises NPC accuracy only from 28.5% to 31.9%, so failures stem from wrong or crashing programs rather than slow ones. Hardening also narrows the class gap from 24.8 to 14.6 points, showing that part of the apparent gap reflects familiarity with textbook phrasing rather than complexity class.

Kaynak: arXiv:2610.30103 · PDF

BibTeX

@article{sayeedi2026did,
  title   = {Did the Problem Actually Get Harder? Testing LLMs on Paired P and NP-Complete Problems Hardened by Adversarial Multi-Agent Rewriting},
  author  = {Nurul Labib Sayeedi and Md. Faiyaz Abdullah Sayeedi and Zabir Al Nazi and Mahbub E Sobhani and Shubhashis Roy Dipta},
  journal = {arXiv preprint arXiv:2610.30103},
  year    = {2026},
  url     = {https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.30103}
}

Tartışma

Bu habere emoji ile tepki ver

Hizli:

Henüz yorum yok. İlk yorumu siz yapın!

Yapıcı ve saygılı yorumlar bekliyoruz. Topluluk kuralları