> For example achieving 66.7% on the AIME 2024 dataset.
We worked _really_ hard, burned _tons_ of cash, and we're proud of our D- output. No wonder there are more papers published than actual work being done.
We worked _really_ hard, burned _tons_ of cash, and we're proud of our D- output. No wonder there are more papers published than actual work being done.
https://artofproblemsolving.com/wiki/index.php/AMC_historica...
Meanwhile the model is trained on these specific types of problems, does not have an apparent time or resource limit, and does not have to take the test in a proctored environment.
It's D- work. Compared to a 12 year old, okay, maybe it's B+. Is this really the point you wanted to make?
Modest results are worth publishing, as are bad results.