腾讯混元联合复旦、清华发布 ExplorationBench,评测 AI 自主探索与规则发现能力
摘要
腾讯混元、复旦大学与清华大学的研究者发布 ExplorationBench,用于衡量 AI 系统自主探索规则的能力,并构建了规则可执行、答案可精确校验的 Alien Worlds 环境。该基准包含 AlienCode(31 处隐藏规则改动、70 个任务)和 AlienLogic(24 条修补后的推理规则、70 个定理),每个答案由解释器或证明检查器评分,不使用 LLM 评判。在 10 个前沿 AI 系统上的测试显示,获得反馈比单纯思考更有效,AlienCode 中最佳系统经四轮探测从不超过 15.7% 提升到 89.0%,而同样轮次无反馈仅 0.5–11.0%;同一系统在同一预算下得分可在 5.7% 到 79.0% 之间波动。论文见 arXiv:2609.30199,代码即将开放。
摘要由模型根据原文撰写,以原文为准。
入选理由
腾讯混元联合复旦、清华发布可验证基准,用规则可执行的外星世界考察 AI 能否自主发现规则,而非依赖记忆。
正文 · 原文
New Research: We are releasing ExplorationBench, a benchmark for measuring how AI systems explore. Scientific discovery begins where known problems end: a system has to frame hypotheses, design experiments, and learn from the results. Evaluating this is hard. Genuinely new answers cannot be checked quickly, and in familiar domains a model can simply recall what it has seen. Addressing this challenge, researchers from Tencent Hy, Fudan University, and Tsinghua University built verifiable Alien Worlds. Their rules are executable, so every answer is checked exactly, and they conflict with familiar knowledge, so recall alone cannot solve the tasks. 🔹 Two sandboxes: AlienCode (31 hidden rule changes, 70 tasks) and AlienLogic (24 patched inference rules, 70 theorems) 🔹 A flawed manual, four rounds of self-designed probes, and closed-book tests after every round 🔹 Every answer graded by an interpreter or a proof checker, with no LLM judge What we found across 10 frontier AI systems: 1️⃣ Getting feedback is more effective than thinking alone. No AlienCode run starts above 15.7%; after four rounds the best reaches 89.0%, while the same turns without feedback stay at 0.5–11.0%. 2️⃣ Designing the experiments matters. Replaying a system's own best probes gives it exactly the same evidence, yet in AlienCode 9 of 10 systems do worse than when they chose the probes themselves. 3️⃣ Knowing a rule is not using it. Even when every required rule is stated correctly, tasks are solved only 73.4% of the time. 4️⃣ One score hides a lot. The same system under the same budget ended anywhere from 5.7% to 79.0%, and rankings barely transfer between the two worlds. CL-bench asked whether models can learn from context. ExplorationBench asks whether they can discover the rules themselves. 📄 Paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.30199 🌐 Website & leaderboard: https://explorationbench.com 📝 Blog: https://explorationbench.com/blog/ 💻 Code (coming soon): https://github.com/Tencent-Hunyuan/ExplorationBench在 X 查看被引用的帖子
来源:腾讯混元 · x.com
引用原文
TencentHunyuan. more 🔛 https://github.com/Tencent-Hunyuan/ExplorationBench[EB/OL]. (2026-10-09)[访问日期]. https://x.com/TencentHunyuan/status/2108386202080657757.