UN TEMA, EN CONTEXTO

Human–AI performance tradeoffs in RE-Bench

Judgments in this source concerning Human–AI performance tradeoffs in RE-Bench. Explora 1 punto de vista con evidencias de 1 fuente.

1 personas · 1 fuentes · 1 opiniones expresadas

Contenido actualizado:

Explorar conexiones ↗

Mapa de perspectivas

Explore por persona. Seleccione dos o tres para compararlas.

1 personas · 1 fuentes · 1 opiniones expresadas

Lilian Weng

AI agents outperform humans at short time budgets but not longer ones

In RE-Bench, the best AI agents scored 4× higher than human experts at a 2-hour budget, yet humans demonstrated better returns to extended effort and surpassed agents at both 8-hour and 32-hour time budgets.

Evidencia a favor

Harness Engineering for Self-Improvement

Extracto original

Best AI agents scored 4× higher than humans at a 2-hour budget, but humans had better returns to longer budgets and exceeded agents at 8-hour and 32-hour settings.
Contexto

RE-Bench : evaluate frontier AI agents on realistic ML research-engineering envs against human experts. 7 challenging, open-ended ML research-engineering environments. Each environment = (scoring function, starting solution, reference solution); each can be run with 8 or fewer H100 GPUs. Examples: optimize a kernel, run a scaling-law experiment, fix an embedding, fine-tune GPT-2 for QA, etc. Includes data from 71 eight-hour attempts by 61 distinct human experts. Human experts achieved non-zero score in 82% of 8-hour attempts; 24% matched or exceeded strong reference solutions.

Compartir informaciónVerificar esta afirmación

Estas son perspectivas individuales, no una medida de consenso. El material fuente permanece en su idioma original.