Hi, first of all, thank you for LiveCodeBench. It has become one of the default references whenever people talk about realistic coding benchmarks, especially in contrast to older, saturated datasets.

I am coming from a slightly different direction. I maintain an open framework called WFGY, and the current release, WFGY 3.0, is a pure-text “Singularity Demo” pack. It is 131 S-class questions written as long-form prompts, targeting things like alignment edge cases, long-horizon planning, fragile world-models and other high-tension scenarios. Everything is MIT-licensed and already used as a long-range stress test for LLMs.

One idea I have been exploring is: instead of only measuring raw coding performance, we can also ask “what happens if the model first absorbs a highly loaded theoretical context, then tries to solve hard code problems afterwards”. In other words, use a TXT like WFGY 3.0 as a fixed preamble and see whether LiveCodeBench scores shift, collapse, or reveal new failure modes.

Would something like a “high-tension preamble” track fit into your roadmap at all? Even a small experimental variant, where selected LiveCodeBench tasks are run with and without such a preamble, could already be very informative.

If this is compatible with your design philosophy, I can draft a minimal proposal so you can quickly judge whether it is worth integrating, or keep it as an external experiment.