|
|
--- |
|
|
configs: |
|
|
- config_name: release_v1 |
|
|
data_files: |
|
|
- split: test |
|
|
path: release_v1/test_50375e15.parquet |
|
|
dataset_info: |
|
|
features: |
|
|
- name: id |
|
|
dtype: int64 |
|
|
- name: problem_id |
|
|
dtype: string |
|
|
- name: problem_desc |
|
|
dtype: string |
|
|
- name: time_limit_ms |
|
|
dtype: int64 |
|
|
- name: memory_limit_MB |
|
|
dtype: int64 |
|
|
- name: checker |
|
|
dtype: string |
|
|
- name: test_cases |
|
|
list: |
|
|
- name: input |
|
|
dtype: string |
|
|
- name: output |
|
|
dtype: string |
|
|
license: cc-by-4.0 |
|
|
language: |
|
|
- en |
|
|
tags: |
|
|
- benchmark |
|
|
- competitive-programming |
|
|
task_categories: |
|
|
- text-generation |
|
|
--- |
|
|
# CF-Div2-Stepfun Evaluation Benchmark |
|
|
|
|
|
Offline benchmark of 53 Div.2 CodeForces problems. |
|
|
|
|
|
## Introduction |
|
|
|
|
|
We introduce **CF-Div2-Stepfun**, a dataset curated to benchmark the competitive programming capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs). We evaluate our proprietary [**Step 3.5 Flash**](https://huggingface.co/stepfun-ai/Step-3.5-Flash) alongside several frontier models on this benchmark. |
|
|
|
|
|
The benchmark comprises 53 problems sourced from official [CodeForces](https://codeforces.com/) Division 2 contests held between September 2024 and February 2025. We develop an offline evaluation framework that utilizes a local grading mechanism as an alternative to real-time online submissions. |
|
|
|
|
|
The generated test cases consist of: |
|
|
|
|
|
- Small-scale test cases, for initial functional verification. |
|
|
- Randomized large-scale data, for performance and complexity verification. |
|
|
- Handcrafted edge cases, derived from common error patterns and "hacked" submissions from real contest participants. |
|
|
- Automated stress testing data, generated by stress testing technique, which keeps generating test cases until one can distinguish failed submissions from correct submissions. |
|
|
|
|
|
To validate the reliability of this benchmark, we run both correct and representative failed submissions from the original contests. Our evaluator correctly identifies 100% of the accepted submissions as "Passed," while 92.45% of the failed submissions are accurately flagged. |
|
|
|
|
|
## Quickstart |
|
|
|
|
|
```python |
|
|
from datasets import load_dataset |
|
|
from pathlib import Path |
|
|
import os |
|
|
|
|
|
dataset = load_dataset("stepfun-ai/CF-Div2-Stepfun", name="release_v1", split="test") |
|
|
|
|
|
# An evaluation example is given below for problem id=1: |
|
|
# make sure you have prepared necessary checkers first |
|
|
# here the checker used is "ncmp" as an example, for other problems inspect the marked checker name |
|
|
# > git clone https://github.com/MikeMirzayanov/testlib.git |
|
|
# > g++ -std=c++20 -Wall -Wextra --static -I testlib/ testlib/checkers/ncmp.cpp -o ncmp |
|
|
assert dataset[0]["problem_id"] == "codeforces/2020A" |
|
|
assert dataset[0]["checker"] == "ncmp" |
|
|
|
|
|
# prepare a submission code |
|
|
submission_code = \ |
|
|
r""" |
|
|
#include <bits/stdc++.h> |
|
|
using namespace std; |
|
|
|
|
|
int find_min_oper(int n, int k){ |
|
|
if(k == 1) return n; |
|
|
int ans = 0; |
|
|
while(n){ |
|
|
ans += n%k; |
|
|
n /= k; |
|
|
} |
|
|
return ans; |
|
|
} |
|
|
|
|
|
int main() |
|
|
{ |
|
|
int t; |
|
|
cin >> t; |
|
|
while(t--){ |
|
|
int n,k; |
|
|
cin >> n >> k; |
|
|
cout << find_min_oper(n,k) << "\n"; |
|
|
} |
|
|
return 0; |
|
|
} |
|
|
""" |
|
|
|
|
|
eval_dir = Path("./eval_test") |
|
|
eval_dir.mkdir(exist_ok=True) |
|
|
with open(eval_dir / "code.cpp", "w") as fout: |
|
|
fout.write(submission_code) |
|
|
|
|
|
# run compilation |
|
|
ret = os.system(f"g++ -std=c++20 -fno-asm -fsanitize=bounds -fno-sanitize-recover=bounds -static -O2 -DONLINE_JUDGE -o {eval_dir / 'code.exe'} {eval_dir / 'code.cpp'}") |
|
|
assert ret == 0 |
|
|
|
|
|
for idx, test_case in enumerate(dataset[0]["test_cases"]): |
|
|
|
|
|
with open(eval_dir / f"{idx}.in", "w") as fout: |
|
|
fout.write(test_case["input"]) |
|
|
with open(eval_dir / f"{idx}.ans", "w") as fout: |
|
|
fout.write(test_case["output"]) |
|
|
|
|
|
# run code |
|
|
# apply more time / space constraints if you like |
|
|
ret = os.system(f"{eval_dir / 'code.exe'} < {eval_dir}/{idx}.in > {eval_dir}/{idx}.out") |
|
|
assert ret == 0 |
|
|
|
|
|
# run checker |
|
|
ret = os.system(f"./ncmp {eval_dir}/{idx}.in {eval_dir}/{idx}.out {eval_dir}/{idx}.ans") |
|
|
assert ret == 0 |
|
|
``` |
|
|
|
|
|
## Evaluation Details |
|
|
|
|
|
The evaluation results are shown below. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Model | C++ (avg@8) | Python (avg@8) | Java (avg@8) | C++(pass@8 rating) | |
|
|
| - | - | - | - | - | |
|
|
| Step 3.5 Flash | **86.1%** | **81.5%** | 77.1% | **2489** | |
|
|
| Gemini 3.0 Pro | 83.5% | 74.1% | **81.6%** | 2397 | |
|
|
| Deepseek V3.2 | 81.6% | 66.5% | 80.7% | 2319 | |
|
|
| GLM-4.7 | 74.1% | 63.0% | 70.5% | 2156 | |
|
|
| Claude Opus 4.5 | 72.2% | 68.4% | 68.9% | 2100 | |
|
|
| Kimi K2-Thinking | 67.9% | 60.4% | 58.5% | 1976 | |
|
|
| Minimax-M2.1 | 59.0% | 46.4% | 58.0% | 1869 | |
|
|
| Mimo-V2 Flash | 46.9% | 43.6% | 39.6% | 1658 | |
|
|
|
|
|
We use the following prompt for all model evaluations: |
|
|
|
|
|
``` |
|
|
You are a coding expert. Given a competition-level coding problem, you need to write a {LANGUAGE} program to solve it. You may start by outlining your thought process. In the end, please provide the complete code in a code block enclosed with ``` ```. |
|
|
{question} |
|
|
``` |
|
|
|
|
|
The compilation and execution commands for C++, Python, Java are given below: |
|
|
|
|
|
``` |
|
|
g++ -std=c++20 -fno-asm -fsanitize=bounds -fno-sanitize-recover=bounds -static -O2 -DONLINE_JUDGE -o code.exe code.cpp |
|
|
./code.exe |
|
|
``` |
|
|
|
|
|
``` |
|
|
python3 code.py |
|
|
``` |
|
|
|
|
|
``` |
|
|
javac -J-Xmx544m {JAVA_CLASS_NAME}.java |
|
|
java -XX:+UseSerialGC -Xmx544m -Xss64m -DONLINE_JUDGE {JAVA_CLASS_NAME} |
|
|
``` |
|
|
|
|
|
For Python and Java evaluation, we use a double time limit. |
|
|
|
|
|
The benchmark kits follow the [testlib](https://github.com/MikeMirzayanov/testlib) pipeline in validation and evaluation. There is a validator for each problem to check test case integrity, and a specific checker to verify output correctness. |
|
|
|
|
|
The rating evaluation follows [CodeELO](https://github.com/QwenLM/CodeElo) methodology. For pass@8 metrics, we calculate the expected score across 8 tries for each problem, with a fail-penalty but no submission-time-penalty. While this approach deviates from empirical competitive scenarios and may result in ratings that are not directly comparable to human participants, it provides a standardized benchmark for consistent cross-model comparison. |
|
|
|
|
|
## License |
|
|
|
|
|
We are releasing the benchmark under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC-BY-4.0) license. |
|
|
|
|
|
## Citation |
|
|
Please cite [Step-3.5-Flash](https://github.com/stepfun-ai/Step-3.5-Flash). |
|
|
|