Evaluating Intermediate Reasoning of Code-Assisted Large Language Models for Mathematics

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2504.17665v2
• Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2025 11:52:51 GMT
• Title: Evaluating Intermediate Reasoning of Code-Assisted Large Language Models for Mathematics
• Authors: Zena Al-Khalili, Nick Howell, Dietrich Klakow,
• Abstract summary: We conduct an in-depth analysis of code-assisted LLMs generated programs in response to math reasoning tasks.<n>Our findings show that the capabilities of models significantly impact the logic implemented to solve the problem.
• Score: 15.695635219034328
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Assisting LLMs with code generation improved their performance on mathematical reasoning tasks. However, the evaluation of code-assisted LLMs is generally restricted to execution correctness, lacking a rigorous evaluation of their generated programs. In this work, we bridge this gap by conducting an in-depth analysis of code-assisted LLMs generated programs in response to math reasoning tasks, with a focus on evaluating the soundness of the underlying reasoning processes. For this purpose, we assess the generations of five LLMs, on several math datasets, both manually and automatically, and propose a taxonomy of generated programs based on their logical soundness. Our findings show that the capabilities of models significantly impact the logic implemented to solve the problem. Closed-source LLMs ground their programs in mathematical concepts, whereas open-source models often resort to unsound reasoning, relying on memorized information and exhaustive searches. Furthermore, increasing the difficulty of problems decreases sound generations for all models, revealing a critical shortcoming of LLMs on complex mathematics, contrary to what accuracy metrics suggest. Our work highlights the need for more holistic evaluations of code-assisted LLMs beyond execution accuracy metrics, toward a better understanding of LLMs' limits in the math domain.

Related papers

• Is LLM-Generated Code More Maintainable \& Reliable than Human-Written Code? [4.893345190925178]
  This study compares the internal quality attributes of LLM-generated and human-written code.<n>Our analysis shows that LLM-generated code has fewer bugs and requires less effort to fix them overall.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-01T15:17:34Z)
• Computational Thinking Reasoning in Large Language Models [69.28428524878885]
  Computational Thinking Model (CTM) is a novel framework that incorporates computational thinking paradigms into large language models (LLMs)<n>Live code execution is seamlessly integrated into the reasoning process, allowing CTM to think by computing.<n>CTM outperforms conventional reasoning models and tool-augmented baselines in terms of accuracy, interpretability, and generalizability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-03T09:11:15Z)
• Investigating the Shortcomings of LLMs in Step-by-Step Legal Reasoning [34.427730009102966]
  We develop an automated evaluation framework to identify reasoning errors and evaluate the performance of LLMs.<n>Our work will also serve as an evaluation framework that can be used in detailed error analysis of reasoning chains for logic-intensive complex tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-08T19:49:32Z)
• Non-myopic Generation of Language Models for Reasoning and Planning [45.75146679449453]
  This paper proposes a novel method, Predictive-Decoding, that leverages Model Predictive Control to enhance planning accuracy. Our experiments show significant improvements in a wide range of tasks for math, coding, and agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-22T17:13:38Z)
• 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.<n>Our framework auto-generates a large number of problems with solutions validated against numerical ground truths.<n>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)
• MathHay: An Automated Benchmark for Long-Context Mathematical Reasoning in LLMs [61.74749961334557]
  MathHay is an automated benchmark designed to assess the long-context mathematical reasoning capabilities of LLMs. We conduct extensive experiments on MathHay to assess the long-context mathematical reasoning abilities of eight top-performing models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-07T02:30:07Z)
• Not All LLM Reasoners Are Created Equal [58.236453890457476]
  We study the depth of grade-school math problem-solving capabilities of LLMs. We evaluate their performance on pairs of existing math word problems together.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-02T17:01:10Z)
• Interpreting and Improving Large Language Models in Arithmetic Calculation [72.19753146621429]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable potential across numerous applications. In this work, we delve into uncovering a specific mechanism by which LLMs execute calculations. We investigate the potential benefits of selectively fine-tuning these essential heads/MLPs to boost the LLMs' computational performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-03T07:01:46Z)
• What's Wrong with Your Code Generated by Large Language Models? An Extensive Study [80.18342600996601]
  Large language models (LLMs) produce code that is shorter yet more complicated as compared to canonical solutions. We develop a taxonomy of bugs for incorrect codes that includes three categories and 12 sub-categories, and analyze the root cause for common bug types. We propose a novel training-free iterative method that introduces self-critique, enabling LLMs to critique and correct their generated code based on bug types and compiler feedback.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-08T17:27:17Z)
• Q*: Improving Multi-step Reasoning for LLMs with Deliberative Planning [53.6472920229013]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capability in many natural language tasks. LLMs are prone to produce errors, hallucinations and inconsistent statements when performing multi-step reasoning. We introduce Q*, a framework for guiding LLMs decoding process with deliberative planning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-20T13:08:09Z)
• MathBench: Evaluating the Theory and Application Proficiency of LLMs with a Hierarchical Mathematics Benchmark [82.64129627675123]
  MathBench is a new benchmark that rigorously assesses the mathematical capabilities of large language models. MathBench spans a wide range of mathematical disciplines, offering a detailed evaluation of both theoretical understanding and practical problem-solving skills.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-20T17:52:29Z)
• 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)
• InternLM-Math: Open Math Large Language Models Toward Verifiable Reasoning [98.53491178426492]
  We open-source our math reasoning LLMs InternLM-Math which is continue pre-trained from InternLM2. We unify chain-of-thought reasoning, reward modeling, formal reasoning, data augmentation, and code interpreter in a unified seq2seq format. Our pre-trained model achieves 30.3 on the MiniF2F test set without fine-tuning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-09T11:22:08Z)
• 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)
• MathCoder: Seamless Code Integration in LLMs for Enhanced Mathematical Reasoning [52.97768001837269]
  We present a method to fine-tune open-source language models, enabling them to use code for modeling and deriving math equations. We propose a method of generating novel and high-quality datasets with math problems and their code-based solutions. This approach yields the MathCoder models, a family of models capable of generating code-based solutions for solving challenging math problems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-05T17:52:09Z)
• MathPrompter: Mathematical Reasoning using Large Language Models [7.953723258038284]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have limited performance when solving arithmetic reasoning tasks. MathPrompter uses the Zero-shot chain-of-thought prompting technique to generate multiple Algebraic expressions or Python functions to solve the same math problem in different ways.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-04T04:43:49Z)

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.