Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Benchmarking Large Language Models for Math Reasoning Tasks

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 2408.10839 v2 pith:KIXHE2AE submitted 2024-08-20 cs.CL cs.LG

Benchmarking Large Language Models for Math Reasoning Tasks

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

The use of Large Language Models (LLMs) in mathematical reasoning has become a cornerstone of related research, demonstrating the intelligence of these models and enabling potential practical applications through their advanced performance, such as in educational settings. Despite the variety of datasets and in-context learning algorithms designed to improve the ability of LLMs to automate mathematical problem solving, the lack of comprehensive benchmarking across different datasets makes it complicated to select an appropriate model for specific tasks. In this project, we present a benchmark that fairly compares seven state-of-the-art in-context learning algorithms for mathematical problem solving across five widely used mathematical datasets on four powerful foundation models. Furthermore, we explore the trade-off between efficiency and performance, highlighting the practical applications of LLMs for mathematical reasoning. Our results indicate that larger foundation models like GPT-4o and LLaMA 3-70B can solve mathematical reasoning independently from the concrete prompting strategy, while for smaller models the in-context learning approach significantly influences the performance. Moreover, the optimal prompt depends on the chosen foundation model. We open-source our benchmark code to support the integration of additional models in future research.

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. QEDBENCH: Quantifying the Alignment Gap in Automated Evaluation of University-Level Mathematical Proofs

    cs.LG 2026-02 conditional novelty 6.0

    On QEDBench, frontier LLM judges over-score university math proofs by up to +0.36 on average relative to human experts, while some solver models fail badly on discrete-combinatorial problems.

  2. GSM-Plus-BN: A Perturbation-Based Benchmark for Bangla Mathematical Reasoning in Large Language Models

    cs.CL 2026-07 conditional novelty 4.0

    The paper releases GSM-Plus-BN, a human-verified Bengali translation of the GSM-Plus perturbed math benchmark, and reports accuracy baselines for six open LLMs under standard and CoT prompting.