SynthStats team
From the ages and lengths of 80 simulated dugongs, Qwen3.6-35B-A3B wrote eight programs in PyMC (a Python library for probability models) that predict length from age. Four of the programs came from single calls and four from a two-round loop, and all eight were scored on 20 held-out dugongs.
We wrote the reference ourselves, knowing how the simulator generates its data.
import numpy as np
import pymc as pm
def model(data):
"""Dugong length against age: the growth curve and priors of BoxingGym's
dugongs environment, with a Normal likelihood and a fixed noise scale.
"""
age = np.asarray(data["age"], dtype=float)
y = np.asarray(data["length"], dtype=float)
with pm.Model() as dugongs_model:
age_data = pm.Data("age_data", age)
alpha = pm.Normal("alpha", mu=2.0, sigma=0.2)
beta = pm.Normal("beta", mu=1.5, sigma=0.5)
lam = pm.Normal("lam", mu=0.4, sigma=0.5)
mu = alpha - beta * pm.math.abs(lam) ** age_data
pm.Normal("length", mu=mu, sigma=0.25, observed=y)
return dugongs_model
Each score above a panel adds up the log predictive densities of the 20 held-out lengths, so higher is better. Coverage is the number of held-out lengths falling inside the 90% band (15 of 20 for the reference, below the nominal 18), regardless of how much density is put on each of them.
Disease spread comes, like dugong growth, from BoxingGym, a benchmark of simulated scientific environments: a program predicts how many of 50 individuals are infected at a given time.
| Program | Held-out log score ± MCSE | Coverage |
|---|---|---|
| Reference | -4.5586 ± 0.0761 | 15 of 20 |
| Floor model | -14.0898 ± 0.1042 | 16 of 20 |
| Single attempt 1 | -4.6292 ± 0.0731 | 16 of 20 |
| Single attempt 2 | -3.1969 ± 0.0190 | 18 of 20 |
| Single attempt 3 | -4.6876 ± 0.0539 | 16 of 20 |
| Single attempt 4 | -3.2267 ± 0.0204 | 18 of 20 |
| Loop proposal 1 (round 1) | -4.9166 ± 0.1399 | 16 of 20 |
| Loop proposal 2 (round 1) | -4.6634 ± 0.0950 | 16 of 20 |
| Loop proposal 3 (round 2) | -7.4306 ± 0.1294 | 16 of 20 |
| Loop proposal 4 (round 2) | -4.5121 ± 0.0879 | 17 of 20 |
Single attempts 2 and 4: gains over the reference of 1.3617 ± 0.0784 and 1.3319 ± 0.0787, both more than two MCSEs. Loop proposal 4: gain 0.0465 ± 0.1162, within two MCSEs, on this one simulated dataset (20 held-out points).
Monte Carlo standard error (MCSE): error from 200 posterior draws, using batch means of the delta-method influence over ten batches of 20 draws.
| Program | Held-out log score ± MCSE | Coverage |
|---|---|---|
| Reference | -45.6085 ± 0.0452 | 19 of 20 |
| Floor model | -262.1291 ± 0.5574 | 4 of 20 |
| Single attempt 1 | -59.9733 ± 0.2544 | 17 of 20 |
| Single attempt 2 | -59.8279 ± 0.2392 | 17 of 20 |
| Single attempt 3 | -60.0128 ± 0.2010 | 17 of 20 |
| Single attempt 4 | failed at model build | no predictions |
| Loop proposal 1 (round 1) | -59.9324 ± 0.1301 | 17 of 20 |
| Loop proposal 2 (round 1) | failed at model build | no predictions |
| Loop proposal 3 (round 2) | -60.5719 ± 0.0794 | 19 of 20 |
| Loop proposal 4 (round 2) | -60.7518 ± 0.1383 | 19 of 20 |
No model-written program beat the reference on this one simulated dataset (20 held-out points).
Monte Carlo standard error (MCSE): error from 200 posterior draws, using batch means of the delta-method influence over ten batches of 20 draws.
At the youngest ages, single attempts 2 and 4 start lower than the reference (low enough for their bands to contain the held-out dugong measuring 0.64 at age 0.16, which the reference misses), while the sampled band of the floor model, which ignores age, is approximately level.
Here the reference misses only one held-out count (4 at time 0.17, below its interval from 5 to 13), while the panels for single attempt 4 and loop proposal 2, which failed at model build, show the observations alone without a band.