AutoCode: LLMs as Problem Setters for Competitive Programming
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Writing competitive programming problems is exacting. Authors must: set constraints, input distributions, and edge cases that rule out shortcuts; target specific algorithms (e.g., max-flow, dynamic programming, data structures); and calibrate complexity beyond the reach of most competitors. We argue that this makes for an ideal test of general large language model capabilities and study whether they can do this reliably. We introduce AutoCode, which uses multiple rounds of validation to yield competition-grade problem statements and test cases. On held-out problems, AutoCode test suites approach 99% consistency with official judgments, a significant improvement over current state-of-the-art methods like HardTests, which achieve less than 81%. Furthermore, starting with a random seed problem, AutoCode can create novel variants with reference and brute-force solutions. By cross-verifying these generated solutions against test cases, we can further filter out malformed problems. Our system ensures high correctness, as verified by human experts. AutoCode successfully produces novel problems judged by Grandmaster-level (top 0.3%) competitive programmers to be of contest quality.
Key facts. Cited by 11 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 25 of its 31 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 Sep 2025.
Builds on
25 of 31 references.
References · 25
- 2023Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learningcited by 4,276
- 2024LiveCodeBench: Holistic and Contamination Free Evaluation of Large Language Models for Codecited by 2,004
- 2022Competition-Level Code Generation with AlphaCodecited by 1,462
- 2023Is Your Code Generated by ChatGPT Really Correct? Rigorous Evaluation of Large Language Models for Code Generationcited by 1,391
- 2024Qwen2.5-Coder Technical Reportcited by 1,203
- 2024DeepSeek-Coder: When the Large Language Model Meets Programming -- The Rise of Code Intelligencecited by 1,181
- 2025Absolute Zero: Reinforced Self-play Reasoning with Zero Datacited by 344
- 2024DeepSeek-Coder-V2: Breaking the Barrier of Closed-Source Models in Code Intelligencecited by 331
- 2024Quiet-STaR: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Think Before Speakingcited by 301
- 2025DiffuCoder: Understanding and Improving Masked Diffusion Models for Code Generationcited by 187
- 2023TACO: Topics in Algorithmic COde generation datasetcited by 160
- 2025AceReason-Nemotron: Advancing Math and Code Reasoning through Reinforcement Learningcited by 87
13 more
- 2025Dream-Coder 7B: An Open Diffusion Language Model for Codecited by 81
- 2025LiveCodeBench Pro: How Do Olympiad Medalists Judge LLMs in Competitive Programming?cited by 55
- 2025rStar-Coder: Scaling Competitive Code Reasoning with a Large-Scale Verified Datasetcited by 51
- 2025CodeContests+: High-Quality Test Case Generation for Competitive Programmingcited by 46
- 2025SPC: Evolving Self-Play Critic via Adversarial Games for LLM Reasoningcited by 42
- 2023ALGO: Synthesizing Algorithmic Programs with LLM-Generated Oracle Verifierscited by 41
- 2025HardTests: Synthesizing High-Quality Test Cases for LLM Codingcited by 23
- 2025ELABORATION: A Comprehensive Benchmark on Human-LLM Competitive Programmingcited by 16
- 2025Rethinking Verification for LLM Code Generation: From Generation to Testingcited by 14
- 2025Can LLMs Generate Reliable Test Case Generators? A Study on Competition-Level Programming Problemscited by 9
- 2024Evaluating the Smooth Control of Attribute Intensity in Text Generation with LLMscited by 7
- 2025LogiCase: Effective Test Case Generation from Logical Description in Competitive Programmingcited by 4
- 2025FormulaOne: Measuring the Depth of Algorithmic Reasoning Beyond Competitive Programmingcited by 3
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 10.
11 papers.
- 2025FrontierCS: Evolving Challenges for Evolving Intelligencecited by 23
- 2026BenchEvolver: Frontier Task Synthesis via Solution-Centric Evolutioncited by 4
- 2026EmbodiedSWE: Coding Agents for Long Horizon Dexterous Roboticscited by 4
- 2026FrontierSmith: Synthesizing Open-Ended Coding Problems at Scalecited by 3
- 2026Code2Math: Can Your Code Agent Effectively Evolve Math Problems Through Exploration?cited by 2
- 2026Beyond Problem Solving: UOJ-Bench for Evaluating Code Generation, Hacking, and Repair in Competitive Programmingcited by 2
- 2026X-Coder: Advancing Competitive Programming with Synthetic Tasks, Solutions, and Testscited by 1
- 2026Scaling the Scaling Logic: Agentic Meta-Synthesis of Logic Reasoningcited by 1
- 2026MathDuels: A Self-Play Benchmark That Growscited by 1
- 2026Themis: Training Robust Multilingual Code Reward Models for Flexible Multi-Criteria Scoringcited by 1
- 2026Combinatorial Synthesis: Scaling Code RLVR via Atomic Decomposition and Recombinationcited by 1
- 2026EmbodiedSWE: Coding Agents for Long Horizon Dexterous Robotics23 Sep 2026
- 2026Beyond Problem Solving: UOJ-Bench for Evaluating Code Generation, Hacking, and Repair in Competitive Programming11 Jun 2026
- 2026BenchEvolver: Frontier Task Synthesis via Solution-Centric Evolution31 May 2026
- 2026Combinatorial Synthesis: Scaling Code RLVR via Atomic Decomposition and Recombination29 May 2026
- 2026FrontierSmith: Synthesizing Open-Ended Coding Problems at Scale14 May 2026
- 2026Themis: Training Robust Multilingual Code Reward Models for Flexible Multi-Criteria Scoring1 May 2026
- 2026MathDuels: A Self-Play Benchmark That Grows23 Apr 2026
- 2026Code2Math: Can Your Code Agent Effectively Evolve Math Problems Through Exploration?3 Mar 2026
- 2026Scaling the Scaling Logic: Agentic Meta-Synthesis of Logic Reasoning23 Jan 2026
- 2026X-Coder: Advancing Competitive Programming with Synthetic Tasks, Solutions, and Tests11 Jan 2026
- 2025FrontierCS: Evolving Challenges for Evolving Intelligence17 Dec 2025