<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Phi-4-reasoning Technical Report · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2504.21318/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2504.21318/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Phi-4-reasoning Technical Report — mentioned by ffitch</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44879819</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2504.21318:44879819</guid><pubDate>Tue, 12 Aug 2025 18:06:13 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;I wonder how modern models fair on NovelQA and FLenQA (benchmarks that test ability to understand long context beyond needle in a haystack retrieval). The only such test on a reasoning model that I found was done on o3-mini-high (https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.21318), it suggests that reasoning noticeably improves FLenQA performance, but this test only explored context up to 3,000 tokens.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2504.21318/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.AI</category></item></channel></rss>
