InteractBench: Benchmarking LLMs on Competitive Programming under Unrevealed Information

Abstract

Competitive programming is increasingly being used to evaluate the algorithmic reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs). However, existing benchmarks primarily focus on full-information tasks where all problem inputs are provided upfront. This overlooks a critical dimension of algorithmic reasoning: the ability of generated programs to operate when key information is not revealed upfront. *Interactive* problems, a distinctive component of competitive programming, embody this challenge. These problems require programs to engage in multi-round interaction with an interactor (a judge program) under strict protocol constraints and limited query budgets. Crucially, new information is revealed *only* in response to queries. To address this gap, we introduce *InteractBench*, a benchmark comprising 322 high-quality interactive problems curated from Codeforces, AtCoder, IOI, and ICPC. Each problem is packaged with executable local interactors, enabling fully offline evaluation without external judge submission. Unlike existing benchmarks, InteractBench assesses whether model-generated code can acquire information and track state dynamically. Our evaluation reveals a significant interaction gap: even the most advanced reasoning models achieve limited success on interactive problems. Beyond success rates, we propose a fine-grained failure taxonomy to systematically diagnose the root causes of these deficiencies. Although algorithmic logic errors remain the dominant failure mode, protocol violations and query-budget overruns are frequently observed. The benchmark is provided in the supplementary material.