REVIEW 2 cited by
Novice Learner and Expert Tutor: Evaluating Math Reasoning Abilities of Large Language Models with Misconceptions
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
We propose novel evaluations for mathematical reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) based on mathematical misconceptions. Our primary approach is to simulate LLMs as a novice learner and an expert tutor, aiming to identify the incorrect answer to math question resulted from a specific misconception and to recognize the misconception(s) behind an incorrect answer, respectively. Contrary to traditional LLMs-based mathematical evaluations that focus on answering math questions correctly, our approach takes inspirations from principles in educational learning sciences. We explicitly ask LLMs to mimic a novice learner by answering questions in a specific incorrect manner based on incomplete knowledge; and to mimic an expert tutor by identifying misconception(s) corresponding to an incorrect answer to a question. Using simple grade-school math problems, our experiments reveal that, while LLMs can easily answer these questions correctly, they struggle to identify 1) the incorrect answer corresponding to specific incomplete knowledge (misconceptions); 2) the misconceptions that explain particular incorrect answers. Our study indicates new opportunities for enhancing LLMs' math reasoning capabilities, especially on developing robust student simulation and expert tutoring models in the educational applications such as intelligent tutoring systems.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Catching The Correct Answer Trap: Characterising AI Tutor Blind Spots When Analysing Student Reasoning
AI tutoring models systematically fail to detect student misconceptions when flawed reasoning coincidentally produces the correct answer, with 71% of failures concentrated in two predictable question types.
-
Atomic Learning Objectives Labeling: A High-Resolution Approach for Physics Education
The paper introduces an atomic learning objective system and shows LLMs can label physics questions with moderate agreement against a single expert's ground truth.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.