Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Are Large Language Models Good Statisticians?

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

arxiv 2406.07815 v2 pith:PUPDHDHA submitted 2024-06-12 cs.CL cs.AI

classification cs.CLcs.AI
keywords llmsstatisticaltasksmodelsstatqaapplicabilitycapabilitieserrors
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capabilities across a range of scientific tasks including mathematics, physics, and chemistry. Despite their successes, the effectiveness of LLMs in handling complex statistical tasks remains systematically under-explored. To bridge this gap, we introduce StatQA, a new benchmark designed for statistical analysis tasks. StatQA comprises 11,623 examples tailored to evaluate LLMs' proficiency in specialized statistical tasks and their applicability assessment capabilities, particularly for hypothesis testing methods. We systematically experiment with representative LLMs using various prompting strategies and show that even state-of-the-art models such as GPT-4o achieve a best performance of only 64.83%, indicating significant room for improvement. Notably, while open-source LLMs (e.g. LLaMA-3) show limited capability, those fine-tuned ones exhibit marked improvements, outperforming all in-context learning-based methods (e.g. GPT-4o). Moreover, our comparative human experiments highlight a striking contrast in error types between LLMs and humans: LLMs primarily make applicability errors, whereas humans mostly make statistical task confusion errors. This divergence highlights distinct areas of proficiency and deficiency, suggesting that combining LLM and human expertise could lead to complementary strengths, inviting further investigation into their collaborative potential. Our source code and data are available at https://statqa.github.io/.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. MasHost Builds It All: Autonomous Multi-Agent System Directed by Reinforcement Learning

    cs.MA 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    MasHost uses reinforcement learning to autonomously construct query-adaptive multi-agent graphs, and its authors report the best average accuracy across six LLM benchmarks.

  2. Reasoning RAG via System 1 or System 2: A Survey on Reasoning Agentic Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Industry Challenges

    cs.AI 2025-06 unverdicted novelty 3.0 of 10

    A review that classifies Reasoning Agentic RAG into predefined (System 1-like) and agentic (System 2-like) workflows, surveying their designs and training strategies.

Pith tools