Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
The paper investigates inference-time optimization strategies, specifically a Diverse Prompt Mixer designed to decorrelate errors in majority voting for mathematical reasoning tasks. Despite extensive experimentation on IMO-level problems within the AIMO 3 competition, the study found that no intervention, including the prompt mixer, could outperform high-temperature sampling. The results highlight that model capability is the dominant factor in performance, dwarfing the impact of inference-time optimizations.
Inference-time hacks to boost LLM reasoning are mostly a waste of time: raw model power matters way more.
Majority voting over multiple LLM attempts improves mathematical reasoning, but correlated errors limit the effective sample size. A natural fix: assign structurally different reasoning strategies to different voters to decorrelate errors. We test this Diverse Prompt Mixer in the AIMO~3 competition: 3 models, 23+ experiments, and 50 IMO-level problems on a single H100 80 GB with a 5-hour limit. Every intervention fails. High-temperature sampling already decorrelates errors sufficiently; weaker prompt strategies reduce per-attempt accuracy more than they reduce correlation. Across a 17-point model capability gap and every inference-time optimization we tried, model capability dominates by an order of magnitude.
