Pith. sign in

REVIEW 15 cited by

MATH-Perturb: Benchmarking LLMs' Math Reasoning Abilities against Hard Perturbations

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 2502.06453 v2 pith:7MRDW5W4 submitted 2025-02-10 cs.LG cs.AIcs.CL

MATH-Perturb: Benchmarking LLMs' Math Reasoning Abilities against Hard Perturbations

classification cs.LG cs.AIcs.CL
keywords reasoningmodelshardmathperformanceperturbationsproblemsapply
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Large language models have demonstrated impressive performance on challenging mathematical reasoning tasks, which has triggered the discussion of whether the performance is achieved by true reasoning capability or memorization. To investigate this question, prior work has constructed mathematical benchmarks when questions undergo simple perturbations -- modifications that still preserve the underlying reasoning patterns of the solutions. However, no work has explored hard perturbations, which fundamentally change the nature of the problem so that the original solution steps do not apply. To bridge the gap, we construct MATH-P-Simple and MATH-P-Hard via simple perturbation and hard perturbation, respectively. Each consists of 279 perturbed math problems derived from level-5 (hardest) problems in the MATH dataset (Hendrycksmath et. al., 2021). We observe significant performance drops on MATH-P-Hard across various models, including o1-mini (-16.49%) and gemini-2.0-flash-thinking (-12.9%). We also raise concerns about a novel form of memorization where models blindly apply learned problem-solving skills without assessing their applicability to modified contexts. This issue is amplified when using original problems for in-context learning. We call for research efforts to address this challenge, which is critical for developing more robust and reliable reasoning models.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 15 Pith papers

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

  1. Testing LLM Arithmetic Reasoning Generalization with Automatic Numeric-Remapping Attacks

    cs.CR 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    An automatic numeric-remapping attack generator reveals 12-26 point accuracy drops on GSM8K for three LLMs while MAWPS and MultiArith stay near 98%.

  2. Characterizing Paraphrase-Induced Failures in Lean 4 Autoformalization

    cs.LG 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Paraphrase sensitivity in Lean 4 autoformalization is dominated by code-generation failures that differ between undergraduate and Olympiad datasets across multiple models.

  3. Robust Reasoning Benchmark

    cs.LG 2026-03 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Perturbations to math problem text cause up to 55% average accuracy drops in open-weight LLMs and sequential solving reveals context pollution in attention mechanisms.

  4. Robust Reasoning Benchmark

    cs.LG 2026-03 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    The Robust Reasoning Benchmark shows frontier LLMs are mostly resilient to textual perturbations on AIME problems while open-weight models suffer up to 54% accuracy drops and exhibit accuracy decay on later problems d...

  5. OPT-Engine: Benchmarking the Limits of LLMs in Optimization Modeling via Complexity Scaling

    cs.CL 2026-01 accept novelty 7.0

    OPT-Engine shows pure-text chain-of-thought reasoning in LLMs loses robustness as optimization complexity grows, external tools fix only local arithmetic, and solver-integrated methods are bottlenecked by automated co...

  6. EngiBench: A Benchmark for Evaluating Large Language Models on Engineering Problem Solving

    cs.AI 2025-09 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    EngiBench shows LLMs accuracy drops with task complexity, degrades under perturbations, and stays below human performance on open-ended engineering problems.

  7. QMFOL: Benchmarking Large Language Model Reasoning via Quantifiable Monadic First-Order Logic Test Case Generation

    cs.AI 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    QMFOL generates monadic first-order logic tasks with controllable complexity via pattern-based structures and round-trip prover verification, then evaluates six LRMs showing performance drops as logical depth and widt...

  8. An Enigma of Artificial Reason: Investigating the Production-Evaluation Gap in Large Reasoning Models

    cs.AI 2026-05 conditional novelty 6.0

    LRMs show a large production-evaluation gap on the VAIR dataset with valid answers but invalid reasoning, driven by answer confirmation bias as evidenced by CoT analysis, linear probes, and causal patching.

  9. Seir\^enes: Adversarial Self-Play with Evolving Distractions for LLM Reasoning

    cs.AI 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Seirênes trains LLMs via adversarial self-play to generate and overcome evolving distractions, producing gains of 7-10 points on math reasoning benchmarks and exposing blind spots in larger models.

  10. Characterizing Paraphrase-Induced Failures in Lean 4 Autoformalization

    cs.LG 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Paraphrase sensitivity in Lean 4 autoformalization arises from compilation failures rather than semantic divergence among successful formalizations.

  11. Blind-Spots-Bench: Evaluating Blind Spots in Multimodal Models

    cs.AI 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0

    A 235-item multimodal stress-test shows frontier closed models outpace open-weight peers by ~10% and leaves shared failures on counting, spatial, and character-level tasks.

  12. Characterize Then Distill: Mechanistic Reasoning in Large Output Spaces

    cs.CL 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Reasoning in large output spaces proceeds via shortlisting then fine-grained reasoning; this characterization enables a mechanistic distillation strategy that outperforms standard distillation.

  13. Towards Reasoning Era: A Survey of Long Chain-of-Thought for Reasoning Large Language Models

    cs.AI 2025-03 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    The paper unifies perspectives on Long CoT in reasoning LLMs by introducing a taxonomy, detailing characteristics of deep reasoning and reflection, and discussing emergence phenomena and future directions.

  14. ReaORE: Reasoning-Guided Progressive Open Relation Extraction Empowered by Large Reasoning Models

    cs.CL 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    ReaORE is a progressive open relation extraction method that applies coarse-to-fine reasoning to improve generalization to unseen relations over clustering or direct LLM generation.

  15. Homoglyph-based Adversarial Perturbation of Introductory Computer Science Theory Problems

    cs.CY 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 3.0

    A homoglyph substitution method perturbs introductory CS theory problems to make them unsolvable by current AI tools while preserving semantic meaning.