Evaluating the capability and efficiency of LLMs from the DeepSeek-R1-Distill model family across four classes of arithmetic and algorithmic reasoning problems reveals potential limitations of naive scaling as a strategy for developing more capable AI systems.
Abstract
Capability and efficiency are two key dimensions of reasoning in large language models (LLMs). Capability refers to the ability to solve a given problem correctly, whereas efficiency refers to the ability to do so with limited resources. When LLMs use Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning to solve problems of controlled hardness, both the number of problems solved correctly and the number of tokens required to reach a correct answer depend on problem hardness and model size. However, how these factors jointly shape capability and efficiency remains poorly understood. Here, we use hierarchical Bayesian models to evaluate the capability and efficiency of LLMs from the DeepSeek-R1-Distill model family across four classes of arithmetic and algorithmic reasoning problems. At a fixed model size, the probability of correctly solving an instance decays approximately exponentially with instance size, our proxy for problem hardness. The decay scale grows sublinearly with model size, indicating that larger models are more capable, but that capability gains diminish with scale. Output length grows as a power law with instance size, which serves as a proxy for difficulty. However, the parameters of this power law do not vary systematically with model size, suggesting that larger models do not become more efficient. Together, these findings reveal potential limitations of naive scaling as a strategy for developing more capable AI systems: capability improves with diminishing returns, while efficiency shows little to no improvement.
Optimization modeling formulates real-world decision problems as mathematical programs that solvers can use to find optimal decisions. Large language models (LLMs) can automate this process, but the resulting correct formulations can require substantial time and memory to construct and solve, limiting practical scalabi...
Zhong Li, Xin Huang, Jin-Hui Wan et al.· 0 citations
It is argued that emergent reasoning in LLMs is a product of three factors: model size, prompting approach, and evaluation metric, and proposed implications for designing benchmarks and assessing capabilities are proposed.
N. Kuotsu· International Journal of Cre...· 0 citations
A novel RAIE taxonomy along four scaling dimensions is proposed, which optimizes the entire thought process through search algorithms and self-verification, and introduces a task-oriented guideline for choosing the best TTS strategy.
Jia-Yu An, Zheng Chen, Yong-Cheng Jing et al.· Proceedings of the Thirty-Fi...· 0 citations
Large language models (LLMs) have recently improved their problem-solving abilities and can solve complex mathematical problems with an increasing accuracy, necessitating the development of more challenging benchmarks. Over the years, the performance of LLMs on several benchmark datasets has also improved, motivating t...
Anurag Dutta, S. Priya, A. Ramamoorthy et al.· AppliedMath· 0 citations
Test-time compute has emerged as a major approach to improving the capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs). However, existing test-time reasoning paradigms rely heavily on externally imposed control, either through fixed reasoning programs or through costly expansion in constrained search spaces, limiting both gen...
Z. Gong, Yi-Kun Hou, Zi-Hao Zeng et al.· 0 citations
How humans grow and maintain abstract knowledge from the sparse, streaming noisy data of experience is a longstanding challenge in cognitive science. Any computational account must satisfy at least three desiderata: It must be (1) data-efficient and compute-efficient, (2) capture gradations of uncertainty to support in...
Wasu Top Piriyakulkij, Samuel Acquaviva, Cassidy Langenfeld et al.· 0 citations
Related blog posts
MIT News · Artificial Intelligence· news.mit.eduOct 7, 2026
Students in MIT’s Concourse program delve deeply into the human condition, debate challenging questions, and learn to develop judgment about issues that can’t be quantified.
Training AI agents with reinforcement learning can be challenging because their tools, context, and decision-making are managed by complex frameworks. Agent Lightning connects existing agents to RL training, making it easier to improve them without rebuilding them. The post Agent Lightning v1.0: A 3,500-Line Lightweight Agentic RL Framework for Training Agents with Real Harnesses appeared first on Microsoft Research.
MIT News · Artificial Intelligence· news.mit.eduOct 6, 2026