Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

ConceptSearch: Towards Efficient Program Search Using LLMs for Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus (ARC)

Singhal, Kartik, Shroff, Gautam·2025·Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence

Abstract

The Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus (ARC) poses a significant challenge to artificial intelligence, demanding broad generalization and few-shot learning capabilities that remain elusive for current deep learning methods, including large language models (LLMs). While LLMs excel in program synthesis, their direct application to ARC yields limited success. To address this, we introduce ConceptSearch, a novel function-search algorithm that leverages LLMs for program generation and employs a concept-based scoring method to guide the search efficiently. Unlike simplistic pixel-based metrics like Hamming distance, ConceptSearch evaluates programs on their ability to capture the underlying transformation concept reflected in the input-output examples. We explore three scoring functions: Hamming distance, a CNN-based scoring function, and an LLM-based natural language scoring function. Experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness of ConceptSearch, achieving a significant performance improvement over direct prompting with GPT-4. Moreover, our novel concept-based scoring exhibits up to 30\% greater efficiency compared to Hamming distance, measured in terms of the number of iterations required to reach the correct solution. These findings highlight the potential of LLM-driven program search when integrated with concept-based guidance for tackling challenging generalization problems like ARC.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1609/aaai.v39i19.34259

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Research works printed but not linked: 14

  1. Acquaviva, S.; Pu, Y.; Kryven, M.; Sechopoulos, T.; Wong, C.; Ecanow, G. E.; Nye, M.; Tessler, M. H.; and Tenenbaum, J. B. 2023. Communicating Natural Programs to Humans and Machines. arXiv:2106.07824. · arXiv
  2. Ainooson, J.; Sanyal, D.; Michelson, J. P.; Yang, Y.; and Kunda, M. 2023. A Neurodiversity-Inspired Solver for the Abstraction & Reasoning Corpus (ARC) Using Visual Im- agery and Program Synthesis. arXiv:2302.09425. · arXiv
  3. Barke, S.; Gonzalez, E. A.; Kasibatla, S. R.; Berg- Kirkpatrick, T.; and Polikarpova, N. 2024. HYSYNTH: Context-Free LLM Approximation for Guiding Program Synthesis. arXiv:2405.15880. · arXiv
  4. Bober-Irizar, M.; and Banerjee, S. 2024. Neural networks for abstraction and reasoning: Towards broad generalization in machines. arXiv:2402.03507. · arXiv
  5. Butt, N.; Manczak, B.; Wiggers, A.; Rainone, C.; Zhang, D. W.; Defferrard, M.; and Cohen, T. 2024. CodeIt: Self- Improving Language Models with Prioritized Hindsight Re- play. arXiv:2402.04858. · arXiv
  6. Chollet, F. 2019. On the Measure of Intelligence. arXiv:1911.01547. · arXiv
  7. Ellis, K.; Wong, C.; Nye, M.; Sable-Meyer, M.; Cary, L.; Morales, L.; Hewitt, L.; Solar-Lezama, A.; and Tenen- baum, J. B. 2020. DreamCoder: Growing generalizable, in- terpretable knowledge with wake-sleep Bayesian program learning. arXiv:2006.08381. · arXiv
  8. Khosla, P.; Teterwak, P.; Wang, C.; Sarna, A.; Tian, Y.; Isola, P.; Maschinot, A.; Liu, C.; and Krishnan, D. 2021. Super- vised Contrastive Learning. arXiv:2004.11362. · arXiv
  9. Mitchell, M.; Palmarini, A. B.; and Moskvichev, A. 2023. Comparing Humans, GPT-4, and GPT-4V On Abstraction and Reasoning Tasks. arXiv:2311.09247. · arXiv
  10. Reimers, N.; and Gurevych, I. 2019. Sentence-BERT: Sen- tence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networks. In Pro- ceedings of the 2019 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. Association for Computa- tional Linguistics.
  11. Wang, R.; Zelikman, E.; Poesia, G.; Pu, Y.; Haber, N.; and Goodman, N. D. 2024. Hypothesis Search: Inductive Rea- soning with Language Models. arXiv:2309.05660. · arXiv
  12. Xu, Y.; Khalil, E. B.; and Sanner, S. 2022. Graphs, Con- straints, and Search for the Abstraction and Reasoning Cor- pus. arXiv:2210.09880. · arXiv
  13. Xu, Y.; Li, W.; Vaezipoor, P.; Sanner, S.; and Khalil, E. B. 2024. LLMs and the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus: Successes, Failures, and the Importance of Object-based Representations. arXiv:2305.18354. · arXiv
  14. Yu, F.; and Koltun, V. 2016. Multi-Scale Context Aggrega- tion by Dilated Convolutions. arXiv:1511.07122. · arXiv

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Singhal, K., & Shroff, G.
Venue
Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence
Published
2025-04-11
Volume
39
Issue
19
Pages
20506-20513
ISSN
  • 2374-3468
  • 2159-5399
Cited by
1
References
2

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: ConceptSearch: Towards Efficient Program Search Using LLMs for Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus (ARC). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1609/aaai.v39i19.34259
The paper
Singhal, K., & Shroff, G. (2025). ConceptSearch: Towards Efficient Program Search Using LLMs for Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus (ARC). Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence. https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v39i19.34259

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.