Same Problem, Different Answer
TL;DR for operators Schug and Lake test a stricter question than whether a reasoning model can solve a problem: does the capability survive when the same latent problem is presented in an equivalent form?1 Across several controlled rule-induction tasks, the answer is often no. The most concrete example comes from integer-sequence program induction. Claude Opus 4.7 solves at least one tested variant in 91.67% of variation sets, but solves all five equivalent variants in only 50.00%. That 41.67 percentage-point gap means a model can look highly capable when evaluation rewards at least one successful formulation while remaining materially sensitive to harmless representational changes. ...