Evaluating Mathematical Reasoning Across Large Language Models: A Fine-Grained Approach

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2503.10573v2
• Date: Mon, 19 May 2025 17:36:27 GMT
• Title: Evaluating Mathematical Reasoning Across Large Language Models: A Fine-Grained Approach
• Authors: Afrar Jahin, Arif Hassan Zidan, Wei Zhang, Yu Bao, Tianming Liu,
• Abstract summary: We present a systematic evaluation of mathematical reasoning abilities across eight leading Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>Our analyses reveal several key findings: DeepSeek-R1 performs competitively with o1 across most domains and achieves the highest accuracy on the MMLU Formal Logic benchmark.<n>We explore how architectural choices, training paradigms, and optimization strategies contribute to variation in reasoning performance.
• Score: 15.960271016276447
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: With the rapid advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AI), Large Language Models (LLMs) have significantly impacted a wide array of domains, including healthcare, engineering, science, education, and mathematical reasoning. Among these, mathematical reasoning remains a particularly challenging capability, often requiring multi-step logic and abstract generalization. While prior work has explored LLM performance on reasoning tasks, comprehensive evaluations that span both depth and breadth across model families remain limited. In this study, we present a systematic evaluation of mathematical reasoning abilities across eight leading LLMs, including two recent DeepSeek models, using three independent benchmark datasets. Our analyses reveal several key findings: (1) DeepSeek-R1 performs competitively with o1 across most domains and achieves the highest accuracy on the MMLU Formal Logic benchmark; (2) distilled variants, such as DeepSeek-1.5B, exhibit substantial performance degradation; and (3) Gemini 2.0 Flash achieves the lowest response latency. Beyond quantitative metrics, we explore how architectural choices, training paradigms, and optimization strategies contribute to variation in reasoning performance. These findings provide new insights into the capabilities and limitations of current LLMs in mathematical domains, and offer guidance for the development of future models better aligned with rigorous reasoning demands.

Related papers

• General-Reasoner: Advancing LLM Reasoning Across All Domains [64.70599911897595]
  Reinforcement learning (RL) has recently demonstrated strong potential in enhancing the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs)<n>We propose General-Reasoner, a novel training paradigm designed to enhance LLM reasoning capabilities across diverse domains.<n>We train a series of models and evaluate them on a wide range of datasets covering wide domains like physics, chemistry, finance, electronics etc.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-20T17:41:33Z)
• Benchmarking Spatiotemporal Reasoning in LLMs and Reasoning Models: Capabilities and Challenges [4.668749313973097]
  This paper systematically evaluate Large Language Models (LLMs) and Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) across three levels of reasoning complexity.<n>We curate 26 challenges where models answer directly or by Python Code Interpreter.<n>LRMs show robust performance across tasks with various levels of difficulty, often competing or surpassing traditional first-principle-based methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-16T18:32:35Z)
• SRPO: A Cross-Domain Implementation of Large-Scale Reinforcement Learning on LLM [18.275547804539016]
  Two-Staged history-Resampling Policy optimization surpasses the performance of DeepSeek-R1-Zero-32B on the AIME24 and LiveCodeBench benchmarks.<n>We introduce two key methodological innovations: (1) a two-stage cross-domain training paradigm designed to balance the development of mathematical reasoning and coding proficiency, and (2) History Resampling (HR), a technique to address ineffective samples.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-19T13:06:03Z)
• Have Large Language Models Learned to Reason? A Characterization via 3-SAT Phase Transition [11.422434149376478]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have been touted as AI models possessing advanced reasoning abilities. In theory, autoregressive LLMs with Chain-of-Thought (CoT) can perform more serial computations to solve complex reasoning tasks. Recent studies suggest that, despite this capacity, LLMs do not truly learn to reason but instead fit on statistical features.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-04T20:57:36Z)
• Challenging the Boundaries of Reasoning: An Olympiad-Level Math Benchmark for Large Language Models [86.45058529521258]
  OlymMATH is a novel Olympiad-level mathematical benchmark designed to rigorously test the complex reasoning capabilities of LLMs.<n>OlymMATH features 200 meticulously curated problems, each manually verified and available in parallel English and Chinese versions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-27T11:20:17Z)
• A Survey on Post-training of Large Language Models [185.51013463503946]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have fundamentally transformed natural language processing, making them indispensable across domains ranging from conversational systems to scientific exploration.<n>These challenges necessitate advanced post-training language models (PoLMs) to address shortcomings, such as restricted reasoning capacities, ethical uncertainties, and suboptimal domain-specific performance.<n>This paper presents the first comprehensive survey of PoLMs, systematically tracing their evolution across five core paradigms: Fine-tuning, which enhances task-specific accuracy; Alignment, which ensures ethical coherence and alignment with human preferences; Reasoning, which advances multi-step inference despite challenges in reward design; Integration and Adaptation, which
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-08T05:41:42Z)
• When Continue Learning Meets Multimodal Large Language Model: A Survey [7.250878248686215]
  Fine-tuning MLLMs for specific tasks often causes performance degradation in the model's prior knowledge domain. This review paper presents an overview and analysis of 440 research papers in this area.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-27T03:39:10Z)
• Game Theory Meets Large Language Models: A Systematic Survey [18.07120579043073]
  The rapid advancement of large language models (LLMs) has sparked extensive research exploring the intersection of these two fields. This paper presents a comprehensive survey of the intersection of these fields, exploring a bidirectional relationship from three perspectives. By bridging theoretical rigor with emerging AI capabilities, this survey aims to foster interdisciplinary collaboration and drive progress in this evolving research area.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-13T08:08:27Z)
• Satori: Reinforcement Learning with Chain-of-Action-Thought Enhances LLM Reasoning via Autoregressive Search [57.28671084993782]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable reasoning capabilities across diverse domains. Recent studies have shown that increasing test-time computation enhances LLMs' reasoning capabilities. We propose a two-stage training paradigm: 1) a small-scale format tuning stage to internalize the COAT reasoning format and 2) a large-scale self-improvement stage leveraging reinforcement learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-04T17:26:58Z)
• What Makes In-context Learning Effective for Mathematical Reasoning: A Theoretical Analysis [81.15503859645149]
  In this paper, we aim to theoretically analyze the impact of in-context demonstrations on large language models' reasoning performance.<n>We propose a straightforward, generalizable, and low-complexity demonstration selection method named LMS3.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-11T11:38:11Z)
• Exploring Large Language Models for Multimodal Sentiment Analysis: Challenges, Benchmarks, and Future Directions [0.0]
  Multimodal Aspect-Based Sentiment Analysis (MABSA) aims to extract aspect terms and their corresponding sentiment polarities from multimodal information, including text and images. Traditional supervised learning methods have shown effectiveness in this task, but the adaptability of large language models (LLMs) to MABSA remains uncertain. Recent advances in LLMs, such as Llama2, LLaVA, and ChatGPT, demonstrate strong capabilities in general tasks, yet their performance in complex and fine-grained scenarios like MABSA is underexplored.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-23T02:17:10Z)
• An Empirical Analysis on Spatial Reasoning Capabilities of Large Multimodal Models [56.537253374781876]
  Large Multimodal Models (LMMs) have achieved strong performance across a range of vision and language tasks. However, their spatial reasoning capabilities are under-investigated. We construct a novel VQA dataset, Spatial-MM, to comprehensively study LMMs' spatial understanding and reasoning capabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-09T03:07:33Z)
• Do Large Language Models Truly Grasp Mathematics? An Empirical Exploration From Cognitive Psychology [13.964263002704582]
  We show that, even with the use of Chains of Thought prompts, mainstream LLMs have a high error rate when solving modified CRT problems. Specifically, the average accuracy rate dropped by up to 50% compared to the original questions. This finding challenges the belief that LLMs have genuine mathematical reasoning abilities comparable to humans.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-19T05:01:56Z)
• A Comparative Study on Reasoning Patterns of OpenAI's o1 Model [69.08287909042421]
  We show that OpenAI's o1 model has achieved the best performance on most datasets. We also provide a detailed analysis on several reasoning benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-17T15:09:03Z)
• Learning on Graphs with Large Language Models(LLMs): A Deep Dive into Model Robustness [39.57155321515097]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable performance across various natural language processing tasks. It remains unclear whether LLMs exhibit robustness in learning on graphs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-16T09:05:31Z)
• MR-Ben: A Meta-Reasoning Benchmark for Evaluating System-2 Thinking in LLMs [55.20845457594977]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown increasing capability in problem-solving and decision-making.<n>We present a process-based benchmark MR-Ben that demands a meta-reasoning skill.<n>Our meta-reasoning paradigm is especially suited for system-2 slow thinking.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-20T03:50:23Z)
• MindStar: Enhancing Math Reasoning in Pre-trained LLMs at Inference Time [51.5039731721706]
  MindStar is a purely inference-based searching method for large language models. It formulates reasoning tasks as searching problems and proposes two search ideas to identify the optimal reasoning paths. It significantly enhances the reasoning abilities of open-source models, such as Llama-2-13B and Mistral-7B, and achieves comparable performance to GPT-3.5 and Grok-1.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-25T15:07:33Z)
• Evaluating LLMs' Mathematical and Coding Competency through Ontology-guided Interventions [47.83142414018448]
  We focus on two popular reasoning tasks: arithmetic reasoning and code generation. We introduce (i) a general ontology of perturbations for math and coding questions, (ii) a semi-automatic method to apply these perturbations, and (iii) two datasets. We show a significant performance drop across all the models against perturbed questions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-17T18:13:07Z)
• Exploring Self-supervised Logic-enhanced Training for Large Language Models [59.227222647741094]
  In this paper, we make the first attempt to investigate the feasibility of incorporating logical knowledge through self-supervised post-training. We devise an auto-regressive objective variant of MERIt and integrate it with two LLM series, i.e., FLAN-T5 and LLaMA, with parameter size ranging from 3 billion to 13 billion. The results on two challenging logical reasoning benchmarks demonstrate the effectiveness of LogicLLM.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-23T06:13:10Z)

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.