🤖 AI Summary
This study systematically evaluates the rigorous proof reasoning and explicit construction capabilities of large language models on Olympiad-level combinatorics problems. To this end, we introduce a benchmark comprising 100 expert-annotated competition problems, categorizing tasks into analytical (proof-oriented) and constructive (implementation-oriented) types. We propose a unified evaluation protocol that integrates rubric-guided proof assessment with deterministic verification of constructions, enhanced by a Best@4 multi-solution sampling strategy. Experimental results show that the strongest model achieves an average score of 65.4% overall (75.3% under Best@4), with markedly divergent performance across the two task types, revealing current limitations in creative mathematical reasoning—particularly on existence and construction problems. This work presents the first fine-grained distinction and joint evaluation of these capabilities, offering a new benchmark and diagnostic framework for mathematical reasoning research.
📝 Abstract
Combinatorics is central to Olympiad-level mathematical problem solving, requiring deep discrete reasoning, creative constructions, and rigorous structural insight. Recent evidence suggests that even today's strongest frontier models remain uneven on Olympiad combinatorics, revealing a gap in creative mathematical reasoning. We introduce ComBench, an Olympiad-level combinatorics benchmark for evaluating and diagnosing the combinatorial reasoning capabilities of large language models. ComBench contains 100 human-annotated competition-level problems organized around two complementary settings: analysis-centric problems, which primarily require rigorous mathematical arguments, and construction-centric problems, which require explicit constructions in addition to correctness justifications. The evaluation protocol combines rubric-guided proof grading with deterministic construction verification, exposing cases where proof quality and construction validity diverge. Experiments on frontier open- and closed-source models show that ComBench is far from saturated: the strongest model reaches 65.4% overall Avg. and 75.3% overall Best@4. We further find that Rigorous Proof Reasoning and Constructive Realization are distinct capabilities: Kimi-K2.6 trails GPT-5.5 on analysis-centric proof grading but surpasses it on construction-centric Best@4, while Existence and Construction problems remain consistently hardest across representative frontier models.