Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

DocMath-Eval: Evaluating Math Reasoning Capabilities of LLMs in Understanding Long and Specialized Documents

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 2311.09805 v3 pith:SOGCFTIS submitted 2023-11-16 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords llmsreasoningcapabilitiesdocmath-evalnumericalproblemssolvingbenchmark
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Recent LLMs have demonstrated remarkable performance in solving exam-like math word problems. However, the degree to which these numerical reasoning skills are effective in real-world scenarios, particularly in expert domains, is still largely unexplored. This paper introduces DocMath-Eval, a comprehensive benchmark specifically designed to evaluate the numerical reasoning capabilities of LLMs in the context of understanding and analyzing specialized documents containing both text and tables. We conduct an extensive evaluation of 48 LLMs with Chain-of-Thought and Program-of-Thought prompting methods, aiming to comprehensively assess the capabilities and limitations of existing LLMs in DocMath-Eval. We found that even the current best-performing system (i.e., GPT-4o) still significantly lags behind human experts in solving complex numerical reasoning problems grounded in long contexts. We believe that DocMath-Eval can serve as a valuable benchmark for evaluating LLMs' capabilities in solving challenging numerical reasoning problems within expert domains.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. SUCEA: Reasoning-Intensive Retrieval for Adversarial Fact-checking through Claim Decomposition and Editing

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    SUCEA improves adversarial fact-checking by decomposing claims into atomic sub-claims, editing each sub-claim toward retrieved evidence, and re-retrieving before predicting the final label.

Pith tools