MARIO Eval: Evaluate Your Math LLM with your Math LLM--A mathematical dataset evaluation toolkit

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2404.13925v1
• Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2024 07:03:44 GMT
• Title: MARIO Eval: Evaluate Your Math LLM with your Math LLM--A mathematical dataset evaluation toolkit
• Authors: Boning Zhang, Chengxi Li, Kai Fan,
• Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) have been explored in a variety of reasoning tasks including solving of mathematical problems. We introduce a comprehensive mathematical evaluation toolkit that not only utilizes a python computer algebra system (CAS) for its numerical accuracy, but also integrates an optional LLM.
• Score: 4.957099360745168
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have been explored in a variety of reasoning tasks including solving of mathematical problems. Each math dataset typically includes its own specially designed evaluation script, which, while suitable for its intended use, lacks generalizability across different datasets. Consequently, updates and adaptations to these evaluation tools tend to occur without being systematically reported, leading to inconsistencies and obstacles to fair comparison across studies. To bridge this gap, we introduce a comprehensive mathematical evaluation toolkit that not only utilizes a python computer algebra system (CAS) for its numerical accuracy, but also integrates an optional LLM, known for its considerable natural language processing capabilities. To validate the effectiveness of our toolkit, we manually annotated two distinct datasets. Our experiments demonstrate that the toolkit yields more robust evaluation results compared to prior works, even without an LLM. Furthermore, when an LLM is incorporated, there is a notable enhancement. The code for our method will be made available at \url{https://github.com/MARIO-Math-Reasoning/math_evaluation}.

Related papers

• ReasonAgain: Using Extractable Symbolic Programs to Evaluate Mathematical Reasoning [54.70811660561151]
  Existing math datasets evaluate the reasoning abilities of large language models (LLMs) by either using the final answer or the intermediate reasoning steps derived from static examples. We seek to use symbolic programs as a means for automated evaluation if a model can consistently produce correct final answers across various inputs to the program. We observe significant accuracy drops using our proposed evaluation compared with original static examples, suggesting the fragility of math reasoning in state-of-the-art LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-24T18:02:37Z)
• HARDMath: A Benchmark Dataset for Challenging Problems in Applied Mathematics [1.5716764919736026]
  We introduce HARDMath, a dataset featuring challenging applied mathematics problems that require analytical approximation techniques. 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.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-13T20:09:41Z)
• ChatGLM-Math: Improving Math Problem-Solving in Large Language Models with a Self-Critique Pipeline [42.61538071832468]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown excellent mastering of human language, but still struggle in real-world applications that require mathematical problem-solving. We tailor the Self-Critique pipeline, which addresses the challenge in the feedback learning stage of LLM alignment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-03T17:51:18Z)
• MathVerse: Does Your Multi-modal LLM Truly See the Diagrams in Visual Math Problems? [99.0305256706604]
  We introduce MathVerse, an all-around visual math benchmark designed for an equitable and in-depth evaluation of MLLMs. We meticulously collect 2,612 high-quality, multi-subject math problems with diagrams from publicly available sources. This approach allows MathVerse to comprehensively assess whether and how much MLLMs can truly understand the visual diagrams for mathematical reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-21T17:59:50Z)
• GSM-Plus: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Evaluating the Robustness of LLMs as Mathematical Problem Solvers [68.77382332826167]
  Large language models (LLMs) have achieved impressive performance across various mathematical reasoning benchmarks. One essential and frequently occurring evidence is that when the math questions are slightly changed, LLMs can behave incorrectly. This motivates us to evaluate the robustness of LLMs' math reasoning capability by testing a wide range of question variations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-29T15:26:14Z)
• MATHSENSEI: A Tool-Augmented Large Language Model for Mathematical Reasoning [2.9104279358536647]
  We present MathSensei, a tool-augmented large language model for mathematical reasoning. We study the complementary benefits of the tools - knowledge retriever (Bing Web Search), program generator + executor (Python), and symbolic equation solver (Wolfram-Alpha API)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-27T05:50:35Z)
• User Centric Evaluation of Code Generation Tools [2.8115477071897788]
  This paper proposes a user centric method for evaluating the usability of large language models (LLMs) It includes metadata in the test cases of a benchmark to describe their usages, conducts testing in a multi-attempt process that mimics the uses of LLMs, measures LLM generated solutions on a set of quality attributes that reflect usability, and evaluates the performance based on user experiences in the uses of LLMs as a tool.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-05T15:56:19Z)
• Planning, Creation, Usage: Benchmarking LLMs for Comprehensive Tool Utilization in Real-World Complex Scenarios [93.68764280953624]
  UltraTool is a novel benchmark designed to improve and evaluate Large Language Models' ability in tool utilization. It emphasizes real-world complexities, demanding accurate, multi-step planning for effective problem-solving. A key feature of UltraTool is its independent evaluation of planning with natural language, which happens before tool usage.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-30T16:52:56Z)
• MARIO: MAth Reasoning with code Interpreter Output -- A Reproducible Pipeline [12.186691561822256]
  We postulate that the inherent nature of large language models (LLMs) presents challenges in modeling mathematical reasoning. This paper introduces a novel math dataset, enhanced with a capability to utilize a Python code interpreter. We propose a tentative, easily replicable protocol for the fine-tuning of math-specific LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-16T08:08:01Z)
• Evaluating and Improving Tool-Augmented Computation-Intensive Math Reasoning [75.74103236299477]
  Chain-of-thought prompting(CoT) and tool augmentation have been validated as effective practices for improving large language models. We propose a new approach that can deliberate the reasoning steps with tool interfaces, namely textbfDELI. Experimental results on CARP and six other datasets show that the proposed DELI mostly outperforms competitive baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-04T17:02:59Z)
• Evaluating Language Models for Mathematics through Interactions [116.67206980096513]
  We introduce CheckMate, a prototype platform for humans to interact with and evaluate large language models (LLMs) We conduct a study with CheckMate to evaluate three language models (InstructGPT, ChatGPT, and GPT-4) as assistants in proving undergraduate-level mathematics. We derive a taxonomy of human behaviours and uncover that despite a generally positive correlation, there are notable instances of divergence between correctness and perceived helpfulness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-02T17:12:25Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.