Interpretability Framework for LLMs in Undergraduate Calculus

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2510.17910v1
• Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2025 17:20:36 GMT
• Title: Interpretability Framework for LLMs in Undergraduate Calculus
• Authors: Sagnik Dakshit, Sushmita Sinha Roy,
• Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly being used in education, yet their correctness alone does not capture the quality, reliability, or pedagogical validity of their problem-solving behavior.<n>We introduce a novel interpretability framework for analyzing LLM-generated solutions using undergraduate calculus problems as a representative domain.<n>Our approach combines reasoning flow extraction and decomposing solutions into semantically labeled operations and concepts with prompt ablation analysis to assess input salience and output stability.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly being used in education, yet their correctness alone does not capture the quality, reliability, or pedagogical validity of their problem-solving behavior, especially in mathematics, where multistep logic, symbolic reasoning, and conceptual clarity are critical. Conventional evaluation methods largely focus on final answer accuracy and overlook the reasoning process. To address this gap, we introduce a novel interpretability framework for analyzing LLM-generated solutions using undergraduate calculus problems as a representative domain. Our approach combines reasoning flow extraction and decomposing solutions into semantically labeled operations and concepts with prompt ablation analysis to assess input salience and output stability. Using structured metrics such as reasoning complexity, phrase sensitivity, and robustness, we evaluated the model behavior on real Calculus I to III university exams. Our findings revealed that LLMs often produce syntactically fluent yet conceptually flawed solutions, with reasoning patterns sensitive to prompt phrasing and input variation. This framework enables fine-grained diagnosis of reasoning failures, supports curriculum alignment, and informs the design of interpretable AI-assisted feedback tools. This is the first study to offer a structured, quantitative, and pedagogically grounded framework for interpreting LLM reasoning in mathematics education, laying the foundation for the transparent and responsible deployment of AI in STEM learning environments.

Related papers

• Implicit Reasoning in Large Language Models: A Comprehensive Survey [67.53966514728383]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated strong generalization across a wide range of tasks.<n>Recent studies have shifted attention from explicit chain-of-thought prompting toward implicit reasoning.<n>This survey introduces a taxonomy centered on execution paradigms, shifting the focus from representational forms to computational strategies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-02T14:16:02Z)
• KAG-Thinker: Interactive Thinking and Deep Reasoning in LLMs via Knowledge-Augmented Generation [35.555200530999365]
  We introduce KAG-Thinker, which upgrade KAG to a multi-turn interactive thinking and deep reasoning framework powered by a dedicated parameter-light large language model (LLM)<n>Our approach constructs a structured thinking process for solving complex problems, enhancing the the logical coherence and contextual consistency of the reasoning process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-21T14:58:53Z)
• 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)
• On the Eligibility of LLMs for Counterfactual Reasoning: A Decompositional Study [15.617243755155686]
  Counterfactual reasoning has emerged as a crucial technique for generalizing the reasoning capabilities of large language models.<n>We propose a decompositional strategy that breaks down the counterfactual generation from causality construction to the reasoning over counterfactual interventions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-17T04:59:32Z)
• Why Reasoning Matters? A Survey of Advancements in Multimodal Reasoning (v1) [66.51642638034822]
  Reasoning is central to human intelligence, enabling structured problem-solving across diverse tasks.<n>Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have greatly enhanced their reasoning abilities in arithmetic, commonsense, and symbolic domains.<n>This paper offers a concise yet insightful overview of reasoning techniques in both textual and multimodal LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-04T04:04:56Z)
• A Survey on Mathematical Reasoning and Optimization with Large Language Models [0.5439020425819]
  Recent advancements in Large Language Models (LLMs) have significantly improved AI-driven mathematical reasoning, theorem proving, and optimization techniques.<n>This survey explores the evolution of mathematical problem-solving in AI, from early statistical learning approaches to modern deep learning and transformer-based methodologies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-22T10:49:32Z)
• Advancing Reasoning in Large Language Models: Promising Methods and Approaches [0.0]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have succeeded remarkably in various natural language processing (NLP) tasks.<n>Their ability to perform complex reasoning-spanning logical deduction, mathematical problem-solving, commonsense inference, and multi-step reasoning-often falls short of human expectations.<n>This survey provides a comprehensive review of emerging techniques enhancing reasoning in LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-05T23:31:39Z)
• Make LLMs better zero-shot reasoners: Structure-orientated autonomous reasoning [52.83539473110143]
  We introduce a novel structure-oriented analysis method to help Large Language Models (LLMs) better understand a question. To further improve the reliability in complex question-answering tasks, we propose a multi-agent reasoning system, Structure-oriented Autonomous Reasoning Agents (SARA) Extensive experiments verify the effectiveness of the proposed reasoning system. Surprisingly, in some cases, the system even surpasses few-shot methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-18T05:30:33Z)
• Proof of Thought : Neurosymbolic Program Synthesis allows Robust and Interpretable Reasoning [1.3003982724617653]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have revolutionized natural language processing, yet they struggle with inconsistent reasoning. This research introduces Proof of Thought, a framework that enhances the reliability and transparency of LLM outputs. Key contributions include a robust type system with sort management for enhanced logical integrity, explicit representation of rules for clear distinction between factual and inferential knowledge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-25T18:35:45Z)
• Enhancing Ethical Explanations of Large Language Models through Iterative Symbolic Refinement [5.108863224378874]
  This paper investigates how hybrid neuro-symbolic techniques can enhance the logical validity and alignment of ethical explanations. We present an abductive-deductive framework named Logic-Explainer, which integrates Large Language Models with an external backward-chaining solver. An empirical analysis demonstrates that Logic-Explainer can improve explanations generated via in-context learning methods and Chain-of-Thought.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-01T16:39:51Z)
• Towards LogiGLUE: A Brief Survey and A Benchmark for Analyzing Logical Reasoning Capabilities of Language Models [56.34029644009297]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated the ability to overcome various limitations of formal Knowledge Representation (KR) systems. LLMs excel most in abductive reasoning, followed by deductive reasoning, while they are least effective at inductive reasoning. We study single-task training, multi-task training, and "chain-of-thought" knowledge distillation fine-tuning technique to assess the performance of model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-02T01:00:50Z)
• From LSAT: The Progress and Challenges of Complex Reasoning [56.07448735248901]
  We study the three challenging and domain-general tasks of the Law School Admission Test (LSAT), including analytical reasoning, logical reasoning and reading comprehension. We propose a hybrid reasoning system to integrate these three tasks and achieve impressive overall performance on the LSAT tests.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-08-02T05:43:03Z)

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.