mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

What Fixed-Rollout pass@k Evaluations Can Identify

arXiv 2609.09245 ↗First posted 8 Sep 2026stat.ML cs.AI cs.LGcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Repeated-sampling evaluations increasingly extrapolate pass@k far beyond the number n of samples collected per problem. We show that, in the pooled/random-task conditional-Binomial model, fixed-n success counts identify only the n free moments of the latent per-task success distribution. Consequently, direct pass@k is identified for k <= n, but generic extrapolated pass@k, tail exponents, and tail constants are not identified for k > n, even with arbitrarily many exchangeable tasks at the same rollout budget. This is stronger than the observation that the usual estimator is undefined beyond n: it characterizes the information missing from the fixed-depth count-law experiment. We give exact count-law-preserving constructions with incompatible extrapolations, state the exceptional unique-extension case, and compute sharp population identified intervals through Hausdorff principal representations. On the public 10,000-rollout-per-problem release of Brown et al., counterfactual n = 16 evaluations leave failure at k = 1000 ambiguous by factors from 1.5 to over 2,600 across four MATH/GSM8K/CodeContests configurations. The calibration shows that intermediate-scale failure share alone does not determine width. Our result does not reject parametric inference-time scaling laws; it supplies the nonparametric baseline against which their assumptions can be evaluated. We give an exact, conservative one-coordinate finite-task confidence certificate and a reporting standard separating direct estimates, identified sets, and model-conditioned forecasts.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 5 of its 14 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Sep 2026.

Builds on

5 of 14 references.

References · 5

  1. 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,320
  2. 2024Large Language Monkeys: Scaling Inference Compute with Repeated Samplingcited by 991
  3. 2025Efficient Prediction of Pass@k Scaling in Large Language Modelscited by 16
  4. 2025Don't Pass@k: A Bayesian Framework for Large Language Model Evaluationcited by 15
  5. 2026Two Calls, Two Moments, and the Vote-Accuracy Curve of Repeated LLM Inferencecited by 3

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026What pass@k Cannot Measure: Evaluating Diversity and Capability Retention after Post-Training
  2. 2026Beyond Pass@k: Measuring Reliability and Security of Agentic Code Generation
  3. 2026Rollout Cards: A Reproducibility Standard for Agent Research
  4. 2026No Universal Signal Predicts Sample-Level LLM Regression under Version Updates
  5. 2026Do Not Waste Your Rollouts: Recycling Search Experience for Efficient Test-Time Scaling
  6. 2026It's the Problem, Not the Path: Budget and Difficulty Confounds in LLM Reasoning Trajectories
  7. 2026Rollout Pass-Rate Control: Steering Binary-Reward RL Toward Its Most Informative Regime
  8. 2026Oracle Gaps in Reliability Coverage: Sampling Noise or Policy Specialization?