AgentCoMa: A Compositional Benchmark Mixing Commonsense and Mathematical Reasoning in Real-World Scenarios

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2508.19988v1
• Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2025 15:47:19 GMT
• Title: AgentCoMa: A Compositional Benchmark Mixing Commonsense and Mathematical Reasoning in Real-World Scenarios
• Authors: Lisa Alazraki, Lihu Chen, Ana Brassard, Joe Stacey, Hossein A. Rahmani, Marek Rei,
• Abstract summary: We introduce an Agentic Commonsense and Math benchmark (AgentCoMa)<n>Each compositional task requires a commonsense reasoning step and a math reasoning step.<n>We find that LLMs can usually solve both steps in isolation, yet their accuracy drops by 30% on average when the two are combined.
• Score: 21.065210731722246
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved high accuracy on complex commonsense and mathematical problems that involve the composition of multiple reasoning steps. However, current compositional benchmarks testing these skills tend to focus on either commonsense or math reasoning, whereas LLM agents solving real-world tasks would require a combination of both. In this work, we introduce an Agentic Commonsense and Math benchmark (AgentCoMa), where each compositional task requires a commonsense reasoning step and a math reasoning step. We test it on 61 LLMs of different sizes, model families, and training strategies. We find that LLMs can usually solve both steps in isolation, yet their accuracy drops by ~30% on average when the two are combined. This is a substantially greater performance gap than the one we observe in prior compositional benchmarks that combine multiple steps of the same reasoning type. In contrast, non-expert human annotators can solve the compositional questions and the individual steps in AgentCoMa with similarly high accuracy. Furthermore, we conduct a series of interpretability studies to better understand the performance gap, examining neuron patterns, attention maps and membership inference. Our work underscores a substantial degree of model brittleness in the context of mixed-type compositional reasoning and offers a test bed for future improvement.

Related papers

• GSM-Agent: Understanding Agentic Reasoning Using Controllable Environments [56.007498767771075]
  GSM-Agent is a novel benchmark for evaluating agentic reasoning in complex environments.<n>We analyze the agentic reasoning patterns by cluster the environment's document embeddings into nodes, and map each tool call to its nearest node.<n>We propose a tool-augmented test-time scaling method to improve LLM's agentic reasoning performance by adding tools to encourage models to revisit.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-26T07:24:37Z)
• Mathematical Computation and Reasoning Errors by Large Language Models [3.0309252269809264]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly utilized in AI-driven educational instruction and assessment.<n>This study focuses on evaluating the accuracy of four LLMs solving three categories of math tasks, including arithmetic, algebra, and number theory.<n>It is observed that the reasoning-enhanced OpenAI o1 model consistently achieved higher or nearly perfect accuracy across all three math task categories.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-13T16:33:02Z)
• Visual Document Understanding and Question Answering: A Multi-Agent Collaboration Framework with Test-Time Scaling [83.78874399606379]
  We propose MACT, a Multi-Agent Collaboration framework with Test-Time scaling.<n>It comprises four distinct small-scale agents, with clearly defined roles and effective collaboration.<n>It shows superior performance with a smaller parameter scale without sacrificing the ability of general and mathematical tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-05T12:52:09Z)
• Do LLMs Overthink Basic Math Reasoning? Benchmarking the Accuracy-Efficiency Tradeoff in Language Models [6.312798900093575]
  Large language models (LLMs) achieve impressive performance on complex mathematical benchmarks yet sometimes fail on basic math reasoning.<n>This paper focuses on the fundamental tradeoff between accuracy and overthinking.<n>We introduce the Overthinking Score, a harmonic-mean metric combining accuracy and token-efficiency for holistic model evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-05T12:31:17Z)
• Ineq-Comp: Benchmarking Human-Intuitive Compositional Reasoning in Automated Theorem Proving on Inequalities [46.111273938884295]
  We study provers' ability to recognize that the given problem simplifies by applying a known inequality such as AM/GM.<n>Although these problems remain easy for humans, we find that most provers -- including Goedel, rewriting, and Kimina-7B -- struggle significantly.<n>Our results expose a persisting gap between the behavior of current AI provers and human intuition.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-19T03:56:05Z)
• ReMA: Learning to Meta-think for LLMs with Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning [53.817538122688944]
  We introduce Reinforced Meta-thinking Agents (ReMA) to elicit meta-thinking behaviors from Reasoning of Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>ReMA decouples the reasoning process into two hierarchical agents: a high-level meta-thinking agent responsible for generating strategic oversight and plans, and a low-level reasoning agent for detailed executions.<n> Empirical results from single-turn experiments demonstrate that ReMA outperforms single-agent RL baselines on complex reasoning tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-12T16:05:31Z)
• LoRA Soups: Merging LoRAs for Practical Skill Composition Tasks [73.09643674975591]
  Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA) is a technique for parameter-efficient fine-tuning of Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>We study how different LoRA modules can be merged to achieve skill composition.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-16T20:33:06Z)
• 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)
• Do Large Language Models Have Compositional Ability? An Investigation into Limitations and Scalability [12.349247962800813]
  Large language models (LLMs) have emerged as powerful tools for many AI problems. They exhibit remarkable in-context learning (ICL) capabilities. How they approach composite tasks remains an open and largely underexplored question.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-22T15:22:34Z)
• 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)
• 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)
• Faith and Fate: Limits of Transformers on Compositionality [109.79516190693415]
  We investigate the limits of transformer large language models across three representative compositional tasks. These tasks require breaking problems down into sub-steps and synthesizing these steps into a precise answer. Our empirical findings suggest that transformer LLMs solve compositional tasks by reducing multi-step compositional reasoning into linearized subgraph matching.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-29T23:24:14Z)

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.