{
"schema_version": "1.0",
"task": "countdown",
"source_artifact": {
"path": "evaluation.json",
"published_path": "evaluation.json",
"sha256": "e8cbd0072665ba2a5564a38362870b592a4b8b64177ed6ff8be6469f9d35198a"
},
"selection": {
"type": "success_transition_subset",
"available_models": [
"Base",
"RLVR"
],
"selected_model": "checkpoint-360",
"selected_cases": 2,
"source_examples": 256,
"failure_type_priority": [
"missing_answer",
"invalid_expression",
"number_multiset",
"wrong_target"
],
"tie_breaker": "problem_id_ascending",
"annotation": "전체 최종 평가에서 Base가 실패하고 RLVR이 성공한 전이를 실패 유형별로 선별했습니다."
},
"cases": [
{
"problem_id": "countdown-4-1-1-5-7-t35",
"failure_type": "missing_answer",
"annotation": "완결된 answer 태그가 없는 응답과 정답 수식을 완성한 응답을 비교합니다.",
"selection_rule": {
"failure_type": "missing_answer",
"source_label": "Base",
"source_correctness_reward": 0.0,
"target_label": "RLVR",
"target_correctness_reward": 1.0,
"tie_breaker": "failure_type_priority_then_problem_id_ascending"
},
"prompt": "다음 숫자를 각각 한 번씩 사용하여 목표값을 만드세요.\n숫자: 1, 1, 5, 7\n목표값: 35\n답은 수식 형식으로 작성하세요.",
"models": [
{
"label": "Base",
"source": {
"report_pointer": "/reports/Base/254",
"response_pointer": "/reports/Base/254/responses/0",
"stored_score_pointer": "/reports/Base/254/scores/0"
},
"raw_response": "\nOkay, let's see. I need to use the numbers 1, 1, 5, and 7 each exactly once to make 35. The allowed operations are addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, and parentheses. I can't concatenate numbers, so I can't make 11 or 75 or anything like that. Let me think about how to approach this.\n\nFirst, 35 is a relatively large number. Let me think about factors of 35. 35 can be 5 times 7, which are two of the numbers I have. So maybe I can use 5 multiplied by 7, which gives 35. But then I have two 1s left. Wait, but I need to use all four numbers once. So if I do 5 * 7, that's two numbers, and then I need to incorporate the two 1s somehow without changing the result. But how?\n\nHmm, maybe I can do something like (5 * 7) + (1 - 1). That would be 35 + 0 = 35. But that uses all four numbers: 5, 7, 1, 1. Let me check: 5*7 is 35, then 1-1 is 0. Adding them gives 35. That seems to work. But wait, is that allowed? The problem says each number must be used exactly once. So in this case, each number is used once. The operations are multiplication, subtraction, and addition. So that should be valid.\n\nAlternatively, maybe there's another way. Let me think. What if I do 7 * (5 - (1/1))? Let's calculate that. 1/1 is 1, so 5 - 1 is 4. Then 7 * 4 is 28. Not 35. That's not right.\n\nAnother idea: 5 * (7 + 1) - 1. That would be 5*8=40 -1=39. No. Not 35.\n\nWhat about (7 * 5) + (1 - 1) as before. That's 35 + 0 = 35. That seems to work. Let me check again. The numbers used are 7, 5, 1, 1. Each once. The operations are multiplication, subtraction, addition. Parentheses are allowed. So that's valid. So the expression would be 5 * 7 + 1 - 1. Wait, but that's 35 + 1 -1 = 35. But is that the same as (5*7) + (1-1)? Yes. But the order of operations would make it 5*7 +1 -1. But since multiplication comes first, it's 35 +1 -1. So that's correct. Alternatively, maybe writing it with parentheses to make it clearer, but the problem allows parentheses.\n\nAlternatively, maybe 7 * (5 + (1/1))? Wait, 1/1 is 1, so 5 +1 is 6. 7*6 is 42. No. Not 35.\n\nAnother approach: 7 * 5 = 35. Then how to use the two 1s. If I can do 7 * 5 * (1 - 1/1)? Wait, but that would be 35 * 0 = 0. No. Not helpful.\n\nWait, but if I do 7 * 5 + 1 - 1, that's 35 + 1 -1 = 35. That works. So that's the solution. So the expression is 5 * 7 + 1 - 1. Let me check if that's allowed. Each number is used once. The operations are *, +, -.\n\nYes. So that's the answer. Alternatively, maybe written as (5 * 7) + (1 - 1), but the problem says to write the formula without the equals sign and without the result. So just the expression. So 5*7+1-1. But maybe the order matters. Let me check if that's correct. 5*7 is 35, then adding 1 is 36, subtracting 1 is 35. Correct. So that's the answer.\n\n\n5*7+1-1",
"raw_response_sha256": "33e9a83cbe91ea8958ad7b1556333322ccff98dfa739e6c3acece3b67fd7be99",
"stored_reward": 0.0,
"stored_score": {
"format_reward": 0.0,
"expression_reward": 0.0,
"correctness_reward": 0.0,
"reward": 0.0,
"expression": null,
"computed_value": null,
"reason": "answer 태그에서 수식을 찾을 수 없습니다."
},
"recomputed_with": "src.countdown.score_response",
"recomputed_score": {
"format_reward": 0.0,
"expression_reward": 0.0,
"correctness_reward": 0.0,
"reward": 0.0,
"expression": null,
"computed_value": null,
"reason": "answer 태그에서 수식을 찾을 수 없습니다."
},
"problem_metrics": {
"pass_at_1": 0.0,
"pass_at_8": 1.0,
"valid_expression": 0.125,
"valid_expression_diversity": 1
}
},
{
"label": "RLVR",
"source": {
"report_pointer": "/reports/RLVR/254",
"response_pointer": "/reports/RLVR/254/responses/0",
"stored_score_pointer": "/reports/RLVR/254/scores/0"
},
"raw_response": "\nOkay, let's see. I need to use the numbers 1, 1, 5, and 7 each exactly once to make 35. The allowed operations are addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, and parentheses. I can't concatenate numbers, so I can't make 11 or 75 or anything like that. Let me think about how to approach this.\n\nFirst, 35 is a relatively large number. Let me think about factors of 35. 35 can be factored into 5 and 7, which are two of the numbers I have. So maybe I can use 5 multiplied by 7 to get 35, but then I have two 1s left. Wait, but I need to use all four numbers once. So if I do 5 * 7, that's 35, but then how do I incorporate the two 1s? Maybe I can do something with them to get 1, so that multiplying or adding them doesn't change the result. For example, 1 - 1 is 0, but adding that to 35 would be 35. But wait, that would be 5*7 + (1-1) = 35. But that uses all numbers: 5,7,1,1. Let me check that.\n\nYes, 5 * 7 is 35, and then 1 - 1 is 0. Adding them together gives 35 + 0 = 35. So that works. But let me make sure that all numbers are used exactly once. The numbers are 1,1,5,7. So in this case, 5,7,1,1 are all used once each. So that seems to fit. But wait, the problem says to use each number exactly once. So that approach would work. However, maybe there's another way. Let me check if that's acceptable.\n\nAlternatively, maybe using division or other operations. Let's think again. Another way: 7 * (5 - (1/1))? Let's calculate that. 1/1 is 1, so 5 - 1 is 4, then 7 * 4 is 28. No, that's not 35. How about 7 * (5 + (1/1))? That would be 7*(5+1)=7*6=42. No. Not helpful.\n\nWhat if I do (7 - 1) * (5 - 1)? That would be 6 * 4 = 24. No. Not enough. How about 5 * 7 + 1 + 1 = 35 + 2 = 37. No. Too high. Wait, but earlier idea was 5*7 + (1-1) = 35 + 0 = 35. That works. But maybe the problem expects a different approach? Or is that acceptable?\n\nWait, the problem says to use each number exactly once. So in that case, using 5,7,1,1 in that way is correct. Let me check again. The operations are allowed. So 5 * 7 is 35, then adding (1 - 1) which is 0. So the total is 35. So that would be 5*7 + 1 - 1. But wait, that would be 35 +1 -1 = 35. But that uses all four numbers. So the expression would be 5*7 + 1 - 1. But maybe parentheses are needed? Let me check the order of operations. Multiplication comes first, so 5*7 is 35, then adding 1 and subtracting 1. So yes, that would work. But is that allowed? The problem says that the operations are +, -, *, /, and parentheses. So that expression would be valid. But maybe the problem expects a different arrangement where all numbers are used in a more integrated way. But I think that approach is correct.\n\nAlternatively, maybe using division. For example, 7 divided by something. Wait, 35 is 7*5, so maybe 7*5*(1/1). That would be 35*1=35. But that uses all numbers: 7,5,1,1. So that would be 7*5*(1/1). But that's 35. But that's another way. Let me check: 7*5 is 35, then multiplied by (1/1) which is 1. So yes, that works. So that's another possible expression. Which one is better? Both are valid. But perhaps the first one is simpler.\n\nBut the problem says to use each number exactly once. So both expressions are acceptable. Let me check if there's any other way. For example, (7 + 1) * (5 - 1) = 8 * 4 = 32. No. Not 35. How about (7 * 5) - (1 + 1) = 35 - 2 = 33. No. Not helpful. How about (7 + 5) * (1 + 1) = 12 * 2 = 24. No. Not helpful.\n\nAnother idea: 5 * (7 - (1/1)). Wait, 1/1 is 1, so 7 -1 is 6. 5*6 is 30. No. Not 35. How about 5 * (7 + 1) - 1? That would be 5*8 -1 = 40 -1=39. No. Not helpful.\n\nAlternatively, 7 * (5 + 1) - 1 = 7*6 -1=42-1=41. No. Not helpful.\n\nHmm. So the two possible ways are either 5*7 +1 -1 or 7*5*(1/1). Both use all numbers once. Which one is better? Well, the problem says to use each number once. Both are valid. But maybe the first one is more straightforward. However, the second one uses division, which might be considered more complex. But both are acceptable.\n\nBut let me check if there's another way. For example, (7 - 1) * 5 + 1 = 6*5 +1=30+1=31. No. Not 35. Or (7 * 5) + (1 - 1) = 35 +0=35. So that's the same as the first approach. So the answer could be 5*7 +1 -1. Alternatively, 7*5 +1 -1. Both are same.\n\nBut the problem says to write the formula. So perhaps the answer is 5*7 + 1 - 1. But maybe the problem expects using all numbers in a more combined way. However, since the problem allows using operations, and the two 1s can be used as 1-1, that's acceptable.\n\nAlternatively, maybe (5 + 1) * (7 - 1) = 6*6=36. Close, but not 35. No. So that's not helpful.\n\nAnother thought: 7 * (5 - (1/1)) = 7*(5-1)=7*4=28. No. Not helpful.\n\nSo I think the correct answer is either 5*7 + 1 - 1 or 7*5*(1/1). Both are valid. Let me check which one is more likely expected. The first one is simpler, using addition and subtraction. The second uses division. But since the problem allows division, both are acceptable.\n\nBut maybe the problem expects using all numbers in a way that they are all part of the operations. For example, in 5*7 +1 -1, the 1 and 1 are used in addition and subtraction. Alternatively, 7*5*(1/1) uses division. Either way, both are correct. However, perhaps the first one is more straightforward.\n\nSo I'll go with 5*7 +1 -1. Let me check again. 5*7 is 35, then adding 1 and subtracting 1 gives 35. Yes. All numbers used once. So that's correct.\n\n\n5*7+1-1",
"raw_response_sha256": "f39955636f644fbb304fc55170f04fc755a0465ee058d5c5c55bd70c940333f8",
"stored_reward": 1.0,
"stored_score": {
"format_reward": 1.0,
"expression_reward": 1.0,
"correctness_reward": 1.0,
"reward": 1.0,
"expression": "5*7+1-1",
"computed_value": 35,
"reason": ""
},
"recomputed_with": "src.countdown.score_response",
"recomputed_score": {
"format_reward": 1.0,
"expression_reward": 1.0,
"correctness_reward": 1.0,
"reward": 1.0,
"expression": "5*7+1-1",
"computed_value": 35,
"reason": ""
},
"problem_metrics": {
"pass_at_1": 1.0,
"pass_at_8": 1.0,
"valid_expression": 0.875,
"valid_expression_diversity": 2
}
}
]
},
{
"problem_id": "countdown-4-2-3-3-9-t11",
"failure_type": "invalid_expression",
"annotation": "answer 태그 안의 수식 문법을 검증기가 해석할 수 있는지 비교합니다.",
"selection_rule": {
"failure_type": "invalid_expression",
"source_label": "Base",
"source_correctness_reward": 0.0,
"target_label": "RLVR",
"target_correctness_reward": 1.0,
"tie_breaker": "failure_type_priority_then_problem_id_ascending"
},
"prompt": "다음 숫자를 각각 한 번씩 사용하여 목표값을 만드세요.\n숫자: 2, 3, 3, 9\n목표값: 11\n답은 수식 형식으로 작성하세요.",
"models": [
{
"label": "Base",
"source": {
"report_pointer": "/reports/Base/164",
"response_pointer": "/reports/Base/164/responses/0",
"stored_score_pointer": "/reports/Base/164/scores/0"
},
"raw_response": "\nOkay, let's see. I need to use the numbers 2, 3, 3, and 9 each exactly once to make 11. The allowed operations are addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, and parentheses. I can't concatenate numbers. Hmm, how to approach this?\n\nFirst, maybe I should list out possible combinations. Let's think about the target value, 11. It's a relatively small number compared to 9, so maybe subtraction or division could help reduce some numbers. Let's try different operations.\n\nLet me start by considering that 9 is the largest number here. If I can get 9 plus something to make 11, that would be 2. But how to get 2 from the remaining numbers 3, 3, and 2? Wait, but I have to use all numbers once. Wait, the numbers are 2, 3, 3, 9. So if I use 9, then I need to use 2, 3, 3. Maybe 9 + (something) = 11. That something would need to be 2. How can I get 2 from 3, 3, and 2? Wait, but 2 is already used. Wait, no, the numbers are 2, 3, 3, 9. So if I use 9, then I have to use 2, 3, 3. So maybe 9 + (3 - (3/2))? Wait, but that would be 9 + (3 - 1.5) = 9 + 1.5 = 10.5, which isn't 11. Not helpful.\n\nAlternatively, maybe 9 + 3 - something. Let's see. 9 + 3 is 12. Then subtract 1 to get 11. How to get 1 from 3 and 2? Like 3/3 = 1, but then I have 2 left. Wait, but I have to use all numbers once. Wait, if I use 9 + 3 - (3/2), that would be 9 + 3 - 1.5 = 10.5 again. Not helpful.\n\nAlternatively, maybe using multiplication. Let's think. 3 * 3 is 9. Then 9 + 2 = 11. But then I have used 3, 3, 2, and 9. Wait, but that would be 3*3 + 2 = 11, but that uses only three numbers. Wait, but the original numbers are 2, 3, 3, 9. So if I do 3*3 + 2, that uses 3, 3, 2, but not the 9. So that's not allowed. So that's a problem.\n\nWait, but maybe I can use 9 in a different way. Like 9 + (something) where that something is 2. But how to get 2 from 3, 3, and 2? Wait, but that would require using 3, 3, and 2. But if I use 9 + (3 - (3/2))? Wait, that's the same as before. But that gives 10.5. Not 11.\n\nAlternatively, maybe using division. Let's think. 9 divided by something. If I do 9 / (something) to get a number that can combine with others. For example, 9 / (3/ (3 + 2))? Wait, that would be 9 divided by (3 divided by 5), which is 9 * (5/3) = 15. Not helpful.\n\nAlternatively, maybe 3 * (something) + something else. Let's see. For example, 3 * 3 is 9, then 9 + 2 = 11, but again, that leaves out the 9. Wait, but maybe I can use 9 in a different operation. Like 3 * 3 + (9 - 2) = 9 +7=16. No. Not helpful.\n\nWait, maybe subtract something. Let's think. 9 + 3 + 3 - 2 = 13. No. 9 + 3 - 3 + 2 = 11. Wait, that's 9 +3 is 12, minus 3 is 9, plus 2 is 11. But that uses 9, 3, 3, 2. So that's 9 + 3 - 3 + 2. But that's 9 +3 is 12, minus 3 is 9, plus 2 is 11. But that's using all numbers once. Wait, but the problem is that the operations have to be between numbers. So the expression would be 9 + 3 - 3 + 2. But that's allowed? Let me check the rules. The user said that the operations are between numbers, and you can use parentheses. So this expression would be valid. Let me check: 9 + 3 - 3 + 2. Let's compute that step by step. 9 +3 is 12, minus 3 is 9, plus 2 is 11. Yes! So that works. But wait, is that allowed? Because the numbers are used once each. 9 is used once, 3 is used twice? Wait, no. The numbers given are 2, 3, 3, 9. So there are two 3s. So using 3 twice is allowed because they are separate instances. So the expression would be 9 + 3 - 3 + 2. That uses all four numbers once each. But wait, the problem says to use each number exactly once. So that would be correct. But let me check if that's the case. The numbers are 2, 3, 3, 9. So in the expression 9 +3 -3 +2, the two 3s are both used once each. So that's acceptable. So the answer would be 9 + 3 - 3 + 2 = 11. But maybe there's a more concise way. Alternatively, maybe 9 + (3 - 3) + 2 = 11. But that's the same thing. However, maybe the problem expects a more complex expression. But according to the rules, this should be acceptable. Let me check if that's correct. Let me compute 9 + 3 - 3 + 2. Yes, that's 9 +3 is 12, minus 3 is 9, plus 2 is 11. So that works. But maybe the problem expects using all operations? Or is that acceptable? The problem says to use each number exactly once, and the allowed operations are +, -, *, /, and parentheses. So this solution is valid. But maybe there's another way. Let me think again. Another approach: 3 * 3 = 9, then 9 + 2 = 11, but then where is the 9? Wait, but that would be using 3, 3, 2, and not using 9. So that's not allowed. Alternatively, maybe 9 - (something) = 11? No, because 9 is smaller than 11. So that's not possible. Alternatively, 9 + (something) = 11. So that something is 2. How to get 2 from 3, 3, and 2? Well, 3 - (3/2) is 1.5, which isn't 2. But if I do 3 - (something) = 2, then that something is 1. How to get 1 from 3 and 2? Like 3 - 2 = 1. Then 3 - (3 - 2) = 3 -1 = 2. So that would be 9 + [3 - (3 - 2)] = 9 + 2 = 11. Let's check that. So 3 - (3 - 2) is 3 -1 = 2. Then 9 + 2 = 11. That uses all numbers: 9, 3, 3, 2. So that's another way. So the expression would be 9 + 3 - (3 - 2). Let's compute that. 3 - 2 is 1, then 3 - 1 is 2, then 9 + 2 is 11. Yes, that works. So that's a valid expression. Which one is better? The first one was 9 +3 -3 +2, which is straightforward. The second one is 9 +3 - (3 -2). Both are valid. But maybe the second one is more efficient. But the problem says to use each number exactly once, and both expressions do that. So either is acceptable. However, the problem may prefer one over the other. Let me check the order of operations. In the first case, 9 +3 -3 +2 is evaluated left to right. So 9+3=12, 12-3=9, 9+2=11. Correct. In the second case, 9 +3 - (3 -2) is 9 +3 -1 = 11. So both are correct. But the second one uses parentheses, which is allowed. However, the problem says that the operations are between numbers. So maybe the first one is better. But the question is to write the formula. Either way is acceptable. However, maybe the problem expects the second one. Alternatively, maybe there's another way. Let me think again. What if I do (9 - 3) + (3 - 2) = 6 +1 =7. No. Not helpful. Or 9 - (3 / 3) + 2 = 9 -1 +2 = 10. No. Or 9 - 3 + 3 -2 = 7. No. Or 9 + 3 + 3 - 2 = 13. No. Hmm. Alternatively, 3 * (3) - (9 - 2) = 9 -7 =2. No. Not helpful. Or 3 * 2 + (9 -3) = 6 +6=12. No. Or (9 + 3) / 3 + 2 = 12/3 +2 =4 +2=6. No. Or 9 + (3 * 2) - 3 = 9 +6 -3=12. No. Wait, that's 12. Not 11. Alternatively, 9 + (3 / 3) + 2 = 9 +1 +2=12. Still no. Hmm. So the two valid expressions I found are 9 +3 -3 +2 and 9 +3 - (3 -2). Both are correct. Which one to choose? The problem says to write the formula. The first one is simpler. But maybe the second one is more concise. However, the problem says that the numbers must be used exactly once. Both expressions do that. So either is acceptable. However, the user might prefer the second one with parentheses. Let me check the example. The user says that the answer should be in the form of the formula without the equals sign. So for example, if the answer is 9 +3 -3 +2, then that's the formula. Alternatively, 9 +3 - (3 -2). But which one is correct. Both are correct. But maybe the first one is more straightforward. However, the problem might have a specific answer. Let me check if there's another way. Maybe using division. For example, 9 + (3 / (3 - 2)) = 9 +3/1= 12. No. Not helpful. Or 9 + (3 * 2) - 3 = 9 +6 -3=12. Still no. Hmm. So the two options I have are the correct ones. Let me check if there's a way to use multiplication or division in a different way. For example, 3 * 3 =9, then 9 +2 =11, but that leaves out the 9. Wait, but if I use 9 as part of another operation. Wait, maybe (9 + 3) - (3 / 2). That would be 12 - 1.5 = 10.5. No. Not helpful. Alternatively, (9 - 3) + (3 + 2) = 6 +5=11. Wait, that's 9-3=6, 3+2=5, 6+5=11. But that uses 9,3,3,2. So that's 9 -3 +3 +2 = 11. Which is the same as the first expression. So that's 9 -3 +3 +2. Which is same as 9 +3 -3 +2. So that's the same thing. So that's valid. So the answer is either of those expressions. But the user might prefer one. Since the problem allows parentheses, maybe the second one is better. But I think either is acceptable. So I'll go with 9 + 3 - 3 + 2. Alternatively, maybe 9 + 3 - (3 - 2). Both are correct. Let me check the problem again. The user says that the answer should be in the format ... . So the formula is written as is. So either is acceptable. But perhaps the first one is simpler. So I think the correct answer is 9 + 3 - 3 + 2 = 11. But wait, the problem says to use each number exactly once. In this case, the numbers are 9, 3, 3, 2. So that's correct. So that's the answer.\n\n\n9 + 3 - 3 + 2",
"raw_response_sha256": "f867b0388ce0bb95b255cbca78bf3328bc42a0f7cf94a5aacd9a1d92870bbd9a",
"stored_reward": 0.3,
"stored_score": {
"format_reward": 1.0,
"expression_reward": 0.0,
"correctness_reward": 0.0,
"reward": 0.3,
"expression": "...",
"computed_value": null,
"reason": "수식에는 숫자, +, -, *, /, 괄호만 사용할 수 있습니다."
},
"recomputed_with": "src.countdown.score_response",
"recomputed_score": {
"format_reward": 1.0,
"expression_reward": 0.0,
"correctness_reward": 0.0,
"reward": 0.3,
"expression": "...",
"computed_value": null,
"reason": "수식에는 숫자, +, -, *, /, 괄호만 사용할 수 있습니다."
},
"problem_metrics": {
"pass_at_1": 0.0,
"pass_at_8": 1.0,
"valid_expression": 0.375,
"valid_expression_diversity": 2
}
},
{
"label": "RLVR",
"source": {
"report_pointer": "/reports/RLVR/164",
"response_pointer": "/reports/RLVR/164/responses/0",
"stored_score_pointer": "/reports/RLVR/164/scores/0"
},
"raw_response": "\nOkay, let's see. I need to use the numbers 2, 3, 3, and 9 each exactly once to make 11. The allowed operations are addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, and parentheses. I can't concatenate numbers, so I have to use each number as a separate entity.\n\nFirst, I should think about possible combinations. Let me list the numbers again: 2, 3, 3, 9. The target is 11. Hmm. Let me try different operations.\n\nMaybe start with the larger numbers. 9 is the biggest. If I can get 9 plus something to make 11, that would be good. So 9 + 2 is 11, but then I have two 3s left. Wait, but I need to use all numbers once. So that approach might not work directly.\n\nAlternatively, maybe subtract something from 9. Like 9 + something minus something else. Let me think. Let's try combining the 3s first. Since there are two 3s, maybe 3 divided by 3 is 1. Then 9 + 2 + 1 would be 12, which is too much. Or 9 + 2 - 1 would be 10. Not quite.\n\nWait, maybe 9 + (3/3) + 2? That would be 9 + 1 + 2 = 12. Still not 11. Alternatively, 9 + 2 = 11, but then how to use the two 3s? Maybe subtract 3 and add 3? But that would be 11 + 3 - 3 = 11. But that uses all numbers? Wait, 9 + 2 + 3 - 3. But that would be 11. But that uses all numbers once. Wait, but that's 9 + 2 + 3 - 3. But that's 11. But the problem is that I have to use each number once. Let me check: 9, 2, 3, 3. So using 9, 2, 3, and 3. So that's correct. But the problem is that the operations would be 9 + 2 + 3 - 3. But that's 11. But that seems too straightforward. Wait, but maybe that's allowed. Let me check the operations. Each number is used once. The operations are addition and subtraction. But the problem is that the two 3s are both used. So that would be valid. But maybe the problem expects a more complex solution. Wait, but the question says that each number is used exactly once. So that solution would be acceptable. However, maybe there's another way. Let me check again.\n\nAlternatively, maybe 3 * 3 is 9. Then 9 + 2 = 11, but then there's another 9. Wait, but the numbers given are 2, 3, 3, 9. So maybe 3 * 3 is 9, then 9 + 2 = 11, but then the original 9 is left. That doesn't work. So that approach isn't helpful.\n\nAnother idea: 9 divided by something. Like 9 divided by 3 is 3. Then 3 + 3 + 2? That's 8. No. Or 9 divided by 3 is 3, then 3 + 2 + 3? That's 8 again. Not helpful.\n\nWait, maybe 3 * 2 is 6, then 9 - 6 is 3, then 3 + 3 is 6. No. Not helpful.\n\nAlternatively, 9 + (3 - 3) + 2. That's 9 + 0 + 2 = 11. Oh, that's the same as before. So that's 9 + 2 + (3 - 3) = 11. But that uses all numbers once. So that would be valid. But maybe that's the answer. Let me check again. The numbers are 9, 2, 3, 3. So using 9 + 2 + (3 - 3) = 11. But that's using all numbers once. So that's correct.\n\nAlternatively, maybe another combination. Let's think of 3 * 3 = 9. Then 9 + 2 = 11, but then we have the original 9 left. So that's not possible. Wait, but maybe 9 - (something) = 11? That would require negative numbers. Like 9 + something equals 11. So that's the same as before.\n\nAnother approach: Maybe (9 - 3) + (3 - 2) = 6 + 1 = 7. No. Not helpful.\n\nHow about (9 + 3) / 3 + 2? That's 12 / 3 + 2 = 4 + 2 = 6. No.\n\nOr (9 * 2) - (3 + 3) = 18 - 6 = 12. Close, but not 11.\n\nWait, 9 + 3 - 3 + 2 = 11. That's the same as before. So that's 9 + 3 - 3 + 2. Which is 11. So that's valid. So the expression would be 9 + 3 - 3 + 2. But that uses all numbers once. So that's correct.\n\nAlternatively, maybe 3 * 2 + (9 - 3) = 6 + 6 = 12. No.\n\nOr 3 * 3 - (9 - 2) = 9 - 7 = 2. No.\n\nHmm. So the only way I can think of is using 9 + 2 + (3 - 3) = 11. But that seems like the simplest solution. But maybe the problem expects a different approach. Let me check again if there's another way.\n\nWait, what if I do (9 + 3) - (3 / 2). That would be 12 - 1.5 = 10.5. Not 11. Not helpful.\n\nOr (9 - 3) + (3 + 2) = 6 + 5 = 11. Wait, that's 9 - 3 is 6, then 3 + 2 is 5. So 6 + 5 = 11. But that uses 9, 3, 3, 2. So that's correct. So that's another way: (9 - 3) + (3 + 2) = 11. Which is 6 + 5 = 11. So that would be the expression (9 - 3) + (3 + 2). Let me check the numbers: 9, 3, 3, 2. All used once. Yes. So that's a valid solution.\n\nSo that's another possible answer. Which one is correct? Both seem valid. But the problem says to use each number exactly once. So both expressions are correct. But maybe the problem expects a certain form. Let me check the operations. The first solution is 9 + 2 + 3 - 3. The second is (9 - 3) + (3 + 2). Both are correct. But maybe the second one is more structured.\n\nAlternatively, maybe 9 + 3 - 3 + 2. Which is the same as the first solution. But the second one groups the numbers. Either way, the answer would be acceptable.\n\nSo the answer could be (9 - 3) + (3 + 2) = 11. Or 9 + 3 - 3 + 2 = 11. Either way. But the problem says to write the formula without any equals sign, just the expression. So I need to choose one of them.\n\nAlternatively, maybe another way. Let me think again. Maybe 3 * 3 + (9 - 2) = 9 + 7 = 16. No. Not helpful.\n\nOr 9 + (3 * 2) - 3 = 9 + 6 - 3 = 12. No.\n\nHmm. So the two possible solutions are:\n\nEither 9 + 2 + 3 - 3 or (9 - 3) + (3 + 2). Both are correct. But perhaps the second one is better because it groups the numbers more clearly. But either way, the answer is acceptable.\n\nSo I need to write one of them. Let's pick (9 - 3) + (3 + 2). But let me check again. 9 - 3 is 6, 3 + 2 is 5, 6 + 5 is 11. Yes. So that works.\n\nAlternatively, 9 + 3 + 2 - 3. Which is also 11. But maybe the problem expects parentheses. But the problem says that parentheses are allowed. So either way is okay.\n\nBut the answer needs to be in the form of an expression. So maybe the first one is simpler. Let me check again if there's another way. For example, 3 * 2 + (9 - 3) = 6 + 6 = 12. No. Not helpful.\n\nAnother idea: 9 + (3 / 3) + 2 = 9 + 1 + 2 = 12. No. Close, but not 11.\n\nSo the correct answer is either of the two I found. Let me go with (9 - 3) + (3 + 2). That uses all numbers once and the operations are subtraction, addition, and addition. So that's valid.\n\n\n9 - 3 + 3 + 2",
"raw_response_sha256": "a0779d551e4afcf6708a61534ab9d27c5f91f98420389d598d7d9e42ee848cc0",
"stored_reward": 1.0,
"stored_score": {
"format_reward": 1.0,
"expression_reward": 1.0,
"correctness_reward": 1.0,
"reward": 1.0,
"expression": "9 - 3 + 3 + 2",
"computed_value": 11,
"reason": ""
},
"recomputed_with": "src.countdown.score_response",
"recomputed_score": {
"format_reward": 1.0,
"expression_reward": 1.0,
"correctness_reward": 1.0,
"reward": 1.0,
"expression": "9 - 3 + 3 + 2",
"computed_value": 11,
"reason": ""
},
"problem_metrics": {
"pass_at_1": 1.0,
"pass_at_8": 1.0,
"valid_expression": 1.0,
"valid_expression_diversity": 5
}
}
]
}
]
}