arXiv preprint ·
How Much Can Language Models Gain from Test-Time Computation?
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
How much can test-time computation improve a language model, and at what cost? Test-time scaling is widely proposed as a substitute for larger models, but existing comparisons mostly evaluate one domain at a time and rarely charge selection to the budget. We introduce SELF-POT, a benchmark and evaluation framework that measures the test-time potential of a model across competition mathematics, competitive programming, and agentic workflows. SELF-POT separates candidate coverage from final accuracy on static tasks, tracks correctness transitions under revision, and measures protocol completion alongside task success in agentic environments. Under a unified budget rule, it compares Direct inference with parallel sampling and self-revision under fixed multiples of the Direct budget, and charges every model call, including selection and critique, in dollars. This design supports two kinds of comparison: the gain a model obtains from additional inference, and a lower-cost model with additional inference against a stronger model. Across five low-cost reasoning models on 350 sealed tasks, with Claude Opus 5.5 Direct as the reference, the returns depend on the domain, the selection rule, and failure handling. When we replay the retained programming candidate pools, public-example selection raises correct submissions from 376 to 453 of 500 scheduled cells while saving 12-49% of logical API cost across models, and simply retaining an available candidate when judging fails recovers 61 submissions at unchanged cost. On identical mathematics pools, judging with fallback yields 186 correct submissions versus 182 for voting, while voting saves 12-21% of logical API cost. These controlled replays show how selection and failure handling change the gains realized from the same generated candidates, and they quantify the marginal value of a model judge.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Machine Learning
SmoothOperator: Enhancing Representations for Fine-grained Open-set Recognition via Modulated Label Smoothing
Seer: Maximum Likelihood Regression for Learning-Speed Curves
Fixing a Model That Learned Worse Cancer Means Lower Risk: Monotonic Constraints in Bladder Cancer Recurrence Prediction
Scale-Recursive Rectified Flows for Few-Step Precipitation Ensembles
Don't Waste the Noise: Importance-Guided Perturbation Allocation under Joint Global and Local Constraints
Get the few papers worth your time in Machine Learning every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.