Methodology / Articles

Reasoning · 2026-10-29

Predict before you test

Hypothesis, not yet tested Methodology 0.1.0 · what the grades mean

Hypothesis. This article sets out reasoning that has not yet been tested against MedGauge results. It will be revised or superseded when results are available.

Writing down expected pass rates per model tier before a task is run, and publishing the difference afterwards, keeps difficulty claims honest.

The practice

Before a task is first run, its builders write down a predicted pass rate for each model tier, with a one-line reason, dated. After the round, the predictions are published beside the measured rates on the benchmark card.

What the prediction is not

The prediction does not decide whether a task enters the holdout, and neither the prediction nor the measured rate ever changes a task’s difficulty class. Difficulty is computed from the task’s structure by a published function whose cut points are fixed before any result. A task enters the holdout when it passes every gate and its structural class is 2 or higher.

Why we expect it to help

  • It prevents retrofitted difficulty. It is easy to call a task “hard” after seeing which models failed it. A prediction made earlier cannot be adjusted.
  • It calibrates builders. Builders who consistently over- or under-estimate difficulty should learn where their intuition is off.
  • It exposes leakage. A task that frontier models pass far more often than predicted is a candidate for contamination review.

These benefits are expected, not yet shown on MedGauge results. The prediction sits beside a second check that is part of the method: after every round, the measured pass rate per difficulty class is published and checked for a monotonic fall; a difficulty function that fails the check is revised in a new version, and no task’s class is changed by it.

Related: Integrity