HARDMath: A Benchmark Dataset for Challenging Problems in Applied Mathematics
read the original abstract
Advanced applied mathematics problems are underrepresented in existing Large Language Model (LLM) benchmark datasets. To address this, we introduce HARDMath, a dataset inspired by a graduate course on asymptotic methods, featuring challenging applied mathematics problems that require analytical approximation techniques. These problems demand a combination of mathematical reasoning, computational tools, and subjective judgment, making them difficult for LLMs. Our framework auto-generates a large number of problems with solutions validated against numerical ground truths. We evaluate both open- and closed-source LLMs on HARDMath-mini, a sub-sampled test set of 366 problems, as well as on 40 word problems formulated in applied science contexts. Even leading closed-source models like GPT-4 achieve only 43.8% overall accuracy with few-shot Chain-of-Thought prompting, and all models demonstrate significantly lower performance compared to results on existing mathematics benchmark datasets. We additionally conduct a detailed error analysis to gain insights into the failure cases of LLMs. These results demonstrate limitations of current LLM performance on advanced graduate-level applied math problems and underscore the importance of datasets like HARDMath to advance mathematical abilities of LLMs.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
DPrivBench: Benchmarking LLMs' Reasoning for Differential Privacy
DPrivBench shows that top LLMs handle basic differential privacy mechanisms but fail on advanced algorithms, exposing gaps in automated DP reasoning.
-
DPrivBench: Benchmarking LLMs' Reasoning for Differential Privacy
DPrivBench is a new benchmark for evaluating LLMs on differential privacy reasoning, with results showing good performance on textbook mechanisms but substantial failures on advanced algorithms.
-
Do LLMs Overthink Basic Math Reasoning? Benchmarking the Accuracy-Efficiency Tradeoff in Language Models
Evaluations of 53 LLMs on 14 basic math tasks show reasoning models use ~18x more tokens with sometimes lower accuracy, non-monotonic gains from extended budgets, and sharp performance drops under token constraints.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.