this post was submitted on 27 Mar 2026
609 points (97.2% liked)

Technology

83220 readers
3077 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The ARC Prize organization designs benchmarks which are specifically crafted to demonstrate tasks that humans complete easily, but are difficult for AIs like LLMs, "Reasoning" models, and Agentic frameworks.

ARC-AGI-3 is the first fully interactive benchmark in the ARC-AGI series. ARC-AGI-3 represents hundreds of original turn-based environments, each handcrafted by a team of human game designers. There are no instructions, no rules, and no stated goals. To succeed, an AI agent must explore each environment on its own, figure out how it works, discover what winning looks like, and carry what it learns forward across increasingly difficult levels.

Previous ARC-AGI benchmarks predicted and tracked major AI breakthroughs, from reasoning models to coding agents. ARC-AGI-3 points to what's next: the gap between AI that can follow instructions and AI that can genuinely explore, learn, and adapt in unfamiliar situations.

You can try the tasks yourself here: https://arcprize.org/arc-agi/3

Here is the current leaderboard for ARC-AGI 3, using state of the art models

  • OpenAI GPT-5.4 High - 0.3% success rate at $5.2K
  • Google Gemini 3.1 Pro - 0.2% success rate at $2.2K
  • Anthropic Opus 4.6 Max - 0.2% success rate at $8.9K
  • xAI Grok 4.20 Reasoning - 0.0% success rate $3.8K.

ARC-AGI 3 Leaderboard
(Logarithmic cost on the horizontal axis. Note that the vertical scale goes from 0% to 3% in this graph. If human scores were included, they would be at 100%, at the cost of approximately $250.)

https://arcprize.org/leaderboard

Technical report: https://arcprize.org/media/ARC_AGI_3_Technical_Report.pdf

In order for an environment to be included in ARC-AGI-3, it needs to pass the minimum “easy for humans” threshold. Each environment was attempted by 10 people. Only environments that could be fully solved by at least two human participants (independently) were considered for inclusion in the public, semi-private and fully-private sets. Many environments were solved by six or more people. As a reminder, an environment is considered solved only if the test taker was able to complete all levels, upon seeing the environment for the very first time. As such, all ARC-AGI-3 environments are verified to be 100% solvable by humans with no prior task-specific training

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] fox2263@lemmy.world 23 points 3 days ago (2 children)

I can’t see AI actually being intelligent until they no longer need to send a built up prompt of guides and skills and the chat history on every submission.

It’s no different from Alexa 15 years ago with skills. Just a better protocol and interface and ability to parse the current user prompt.

In my opinion of course.

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

Ya i agree. The whole infrastructure of how these work is flawed for a true AI/AGI.

It might be able to do a lot of cool things, but its fundamentally flawed at its core.

Someone will need to figure out something completely different for a true AI.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] PhoenixDog@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Right? I have a Google Home Mini in our kitchen and if we ask it a question it just pulls a source from a website and tells us. That's it. Nothing intelligent about it.

AI now is no different. It's just pulling more complex wording from more (albeit illegally) sources to give a (albeit sometimes incorrect) better description of the question asked.

AI is just as stupid as Alexa is/was 15 years ago. It just has more information to pull from and still fucks it up.

[–] Grimtuck@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

LLM's are just very well-read morons.

[–] HaunchesTV@feddit.uk 143 points 4 days ago (3 children)

Grok Reasoning: 0%

Hilarious

[–] brsrklf@jlai.lu 78 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Reasoning is woke propaganda anyway.

[–] Janx@piefed.social 21 points 3 days ago

Grok isn't designed to solve problems. It's designed to create sexually explicit images of children for Republicans...

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mechoman444@lemmy.world 29 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I know lemmy's very anti-ai but this is really fascinating stuff.

[–] PhoenixDog@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago (18 children)

We're anti-AI because AI is fucking stupid. Both literally and figuratively.

load more comments (18 replies)
[–] communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

They get 85% on the last benchmark, this one was specifically designed to stump them, when the last one came out everyone said the same things as this go around.

will anyone be retracting their statements when they get to 85% on this one?

[–] Noja@sopuli.xyz 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)

So they already have AGI? Why doesn't it solve new problems then? Bunch of bullshit, they're just adjusting their models to the "benchmarks" to get more VC funding

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] SaraTonin@lemmy.world 43 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Tell me again how AGI is just around the corner, Sam

[–] Vupware@lemmy.zip 18 points 3 days ago (3 children)

When Sammy fuck says “we’re so close to AGI, I can just feel it. Like a tingle on the tip of my shrimpdick it’s getting so close to blossoming into something guys”, just ignore him. He’s crazy man!

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] XLE@piefed.social 11 points 3 days ago (1 children)
[–] pyre@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

to be fair, he's not human so he's just guessing based on his observations earth as a demon

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Bubbaonthebeach@lemmy.ca 20 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I tend to be anti-AI because it doesn't seem to me to be anything other than a super fast regurgitator of data. If a database can be searched for an answer, AI can do that faster than a human. However it doesn't to seem to be able to take some portion of that database, understand it, and then use that information to solve a novel problem.

[–] cmhe@lemmy.world 17 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Well... It cannot even search databases without errors.

LLMs just produce plausible replies in natural languages very quickly and this is useful in certain situations. Sometimes it helps humans getting started with a task, but as it is now, it cannot replace them. As much as the capital class want it, and sink our money into it.

load more comments (2 replies)

It's almost as if a chatbot isn't actually thinking.

[–] GreatBlueHeron@lemmy.ca 50 points 4 days ago (1 children)

It's fun to point at the crappy performance of current technology. But all I can think about is the amount of power and hardware the AI bros are going to burn through trying to improve their results.

[–] partofthevoice@lemmy.zip 23 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Funnier yet will be if they continue to just train the model on that particular kind of test, invalidating its results in the process.

[–] RustyShackleford@piefed.social 53 points 4 days ago (17 children)

As a psychiatrist, I have a theory about what’s missing in AI. First, it lacks childhood dependency and attachments. Second, it struggles to overcome repeated pain and suffering. Third, it lacks regular eating and restroom breaks. Fourth, it struggles to accept loss in everyday situations. Finally, it lacks the concept of our inevitable death. Without these nagging memories and concepts, machines will simply revert to the simpler concepts we use them for in our recent times, such as stealing cryptocurrency. After all, we live in a world run by capitalism, so it’s only logical. ¯\(ツ)

[–] CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 113 points 4 days ago (9 children)

As a technologist, I have to remind everyone that AI is not intelligence. It's a word prediction/statistical machine. It's guessing at a surprisingly good rate what words follow the words before it.

It's math. All the way down.

We as humans have simply taken these words and have said that it is "intelligence".

[–] unpossum@sh.itjust.works 57 points 4 days ago (21 children)

As another technologist, I have to remind everyone that unless you subscribe to some rather fringe theories, humans are also based on standard physics.

Which is math. All the way down.

[–] NewOldGuard@lemmy.ml 26 points 3 days ago (4 children)

As a mathematician, it should be noted that the mathematics of physics aren’t laws of the universe, they are models of the laws of the universe. They’re useful for understanding and predicting, but are purely descriptive, not prescriptive. And as they say, all models are wrong, but some are useful

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 3 days ago

As a random person on the Internet I don't actually have anything to add but felt it would be nice to jump in.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] HereIAm@lemmy.world 29 points 4 days ago

I agree, the maths argument is not a good one. While a neural network is perhaps closer to what a brain is than just a CPU (or a clock, as it was compared to in he olden days), it would be a very big mistake to equate the two.

load more comments (19 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Here is a way of describing what I see as 'the problem':

An LLM cannot forget things in its base training data set.

Its permanent memory... is totally permanent.

And this memory has a bunch of wrong ideas, a bunch of nonsensical associations, a bunch of false facts, a bunch of meaningless gibberish.

It has no way of evaluating its own knowledge set for consistency, coherence, and stability.

It literally cannot learn and grow, because it cannot realize why it made mistakes, it cannot discard or ammend in a permanent way, concepts that are incoherent, faulty ways of reasoning (associating) things.

Seriously, ask an LLM a trick question, then tell it it was wrong, explain the correct answer, then ask it to determine why it was wrong.

Then give it another similar category of trick question, but that is specifically different, repeat.

The closer you try to get it toward reworking a fundamental axiom it holds to that is flawed, the closer it gets to responding in totally paradoxical, illogical gibberish, or just stuck in some kind of repetetive loop.

... Learning is as much building new ideas and experiences, as it is reevaluating your old ideas and experiences, and discarding concepts that are wrong or insufficient.

Biological brains have neuroplasticity.

So far, silicon ones do not.

load more comments (15 replies)
[–] Tetragrade@leminal.space 24 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

This replay is the funniest shit lmao. Keep building that bridge Claude.

https://arcprize.org/replay/0964128b-a2f5-4c5b-886e-497d893f429d

Interesting that it seems to be perceiving the environment mostly accurately, and is just completely wrong about the purpose of all the game objects.

[–] bss03@infosec.pub 13 points 3 days ago (3 children)

I couldn't find replays. Are there more? Also, it is a bit funny that "building the bridge" which at one point seems to be Claude's "chosen goal" is just "running out of moves" and failing the task.

Task failed successfully, Claude. Task failed, successfully.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] arcine@jlai.lu 14 points 3 days ago (5 children)

Try spelling things phonetically (example: faux net tick alley), that's one of my benchmarks that AI fails almost every time.

If the input is at all long, or purposefully includes a lot of words about a specific unrelated theme to the coded message, it's impossible.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 27 points 4 days ago

Can't wait for this to be the new captcha.

[–] UnrepentantAlgebra@lemmy.world 19 points 3 days ago (8 children)

If human scores were included, they would be at 100%, at the cost of approximately $250

Wait, why did it cost real humans $250 to pass the test?

[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 22 points 3 days ago

I assume it’s an hourly wage or something. Just because humans can work for free if they choose, doesn’t mean they have no cost associated with them. Just like a company could choose to give away unlimited tokens, those tokens still have a standard cost.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›