Revised arXiv paper says AI agent solved 44 of 50 IMO geometry problems using ~13,000 examples

A revised arXiv preprint reports that an AI geometry system called InternGeometry solved 44 of 50 International Mathematical Olympiad geometry problems while using only about 13,000 training examples, a far smaller dataset than the hundreds of millions of synthetic examples reported for earlier specialist systems.

That data-efficiency claim is the main reason the result stands out. According to the paper, titled “Achieving Olympiad-Level Geometry Large Language Model Agent via Complexity Boosting Reinforcement Learning,” InternGeometry reached slightly higher benchmark performance than recent systems such as AlphaGeometry2 and SeedGeometry while training on a tiny fraction of their data. The preprint, from researchers at Shanghai AI Laboratory and academic collaborators, was first submitted to arXiv on Dec. 11, 2025, and most recently revised as version 5 on Sept. 4, 2026.

On the benchmark the authors call IMO-50, or IMO-AG-50, the paper reports InternGeometry solved 44 of 50 geometry problems drawn from IMO contests from 2000 to 2024. The paper lists SeedGeometry at 43 of 50 and AlphaGeometry2 at 42 of 50, and says the 44-point score is above the benchmark’s cited average gold-medalist score of 40.9, a baseline from the earlier AlphaGeometry2 evaluation. The result is reported under pass@256, meaning the system gets up to 256 sampled attempts per problem and counts as successful if any one of those attempts finds a solution. That matters because the score reflects both the model and the search budget used at evaluation.

The paper says InternGeometry is built on InternThinker-32B and works as an LLM agent rather than a purely fixed theorem-solving pipeline. In practice, that means the model repeatedly proposes geometric statements and auxiliary constructions — extra lines, points or relationships that can unlock a proof — and checks them with a symbolic engine called InternGeometry-DDAR, which the authors describe as built on the open-source Newclid project. The engine’s feedback then guides the next move. The paper says a dynamic memory mechanism lets the system sustain more than 200 such interactions on a single problem, and that the model can sometimes suggest auxiliary constructions not found in human-written solutions.

Training is also central to the paper’s claim. The authors say InternGeometry used roughly 7,000 cold-start formalized examples and about 6,000 synthesized examples from its own pipeline, for around 13,000 examples total. They describe that as about 0.004% of the data used by AlphaGeometry2. For context, AlphaGeometry2 reported training on roughly 300 million synthetic theorems, while the InternGeometry paper lists SeedGeometry at about 230 million. The new paper’s training method, called Complexity-Boosting Reinforcement Learning, is described as a curriculum that gradually increases the difficulty of synthesized problems over successive stages.

The authors summarize the result this way in the abstract: “Built on InternThinker-32B, InternGeometry solves 44 of 50 IMO geometry problems (2000-2024), exceeding the average gold medalist score (40.9), using only 13K training examples, just 0.004% of the data used by AlphaGeometry 2, demonstrating the potential of LLM agents on expert-level geometry tasks.”

Still, the benchmark should not be confused with sitting a live Olympiad exam. These are paper-reported results on a formalized geometry benchmark, and scores depend on how problems are encoded and on inference settings such as pass@256 sampling. That is also why comparisons to “gold-medalist level” need the benchmark qualifier: the 40.9 figure comes from prior evaluation on this same problem set, not from a live contest under IMO conditions.

The preprint adds to a fast-moving line of work led in recent years by specialized neuro-symbolic geometry systems, especially AlphaGeometry and AlphaGeometry2. AlphaGeometry2 had framed its own advance similarly, saying it had “surpassed an average gold medalist in solving Olympiad geometry problems.”

For now, independent reproduction remains pending. At the time of checking, the InternGeometry paper said the authors “will release the model, data, and symbolic engine,” but no public repository had been confirmed.