Automatically Generating Hard Math Problems from Hypothesis-Driven Error Analysis
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.04386v1
- Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2026 03:27:48 GMT
- Title: Automatically Generating Hard Math Problems from Hypothesis-Driven Error Analysis
- Abstract summary: We propose a new benchmark generation pipeline that uses AI-generated hypotheses to identify the specific math concepts and skills that LLMs struggle with.<n>Our pipeline is highly adaptable and can be applied beyond math to explore a wide range of LLM capabilities.
- Score: 16.008582390875656
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: Numerous math benchmarks exist to evaluate LLMs' mathematical capabilities. However, most involve extensive manual effort and are difficult to scale. Consequently, they cannot keep pace with LLM development or easily provide new instances to mitigate overfitting. Some researchers have proposed automatic benchmark generation methods, but few focus on identifying the specific math concepts and skills on which LLMs are error-prone, and most can only generate category-specific benchmarks. To address these limitations, we propose a new math benchmark generation pipeline that uses AI-generated hypotheses to identify the specific math concepts and skills that LLMs struggle with, and then generates new benchmark problems targeting these weaknesses. Experiments show that hypothesis accuracy positively correlates with the difficulty of the generated problems: problems generated from the most accurate hypotheses reduce Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct's accuracy to as low as 45%, compared to 77% on the original MATH benchmark. Furthermore, our pipeline is highly adaptable and can be applied beyond math to explore a wide range of LLM capabilities, making it a valuable tool for investigating how LLMs perform across different domains.
Related papers
- SciML Agents: Write the Solver, Not the Solution [69.5021018644143]
We introduce two new datasets: a diagnostic dataset of adversarial "misleading" problems; and a large-scale benchmark of 1,000 diverse ODE tasks.<n>We evaluate open- and closed-source LLM models along two axes: (i) unguided versus guided prompting with domain-specific knowledge; and (ii) off-the-shelf versus fine-tuned variants.<n>Preliminary results indicate that careful prompting and fine-tuning can yield a specialized LLM agent capable of reliably solving simple ODE problems.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-09-12T02:53:57Z) - Evaluating Intermediate Reasoning of Code-Assisted Large Language Models for Mathematics [15.695635219034328]
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.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-04-24T15:34:24Z) - MathConstruct: Challenging LLM Reasoning with Constructive Proofs [4.655668424508813]
MathConstruct is a new benchmark of 121 challenging problems sourced from various math competitions.<n>It targets constructive proofs, a widely encountered problem type requiring the construction of mathematical objects with specific properties.<n>These proofs are particularly suitable for Large Language Models evaluation, as solution correctness can be easily verified.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-02-14T14:44:22Z) - Leveraging Online Olympiad-Level Math Problems for LLMs Training and Contamination-Resistant Evaluation [55.21013307734612]
AoPS-Instruct is a dataset of more than 600,000 high-quality QA pairs.<n>LiveAoPSBench is an evolving evaluation set with timestamps, derived from the latest forum data.<n>Our work presents a scalable approach to creating and maintaining large-scale, high-quality datasets for advanced math reasoning.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-01-24T06:39:38Z) - 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) - Subtle Errors in Reasoning: Preference Learning via Error-injected Self-editing [59.405145971637204]
We propose a novel preference learning framework called eRror-Injected Self-Editing (RISE)<n>RISE injects predefined subtle errors into pivotal tokens in reasoning or steps to construct hard pairs for error mitigation.<n>Experiments validate the effectiveness of RISE, with preference learning on Qwen2-7B-Instruct yielding notable improvements of 3.0% on GSM8K and 7.9% on MATH with only 4.5K training samples.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-10-09T07:43:38Z) - 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) - Achieving >97% on GSM8K: Deeply Understanding the Problems Makes LLMs Better Solvers for Math Word Problems [50.76385564061713]
Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting has enhanced the performance of Large Language Models (LLMs) across various reasoning tasks.<n>CoT usually suffers from three pitfalls: semantic misunderstanding errors, calculation errors, and step-missing errors.<n>We propose Deeply Understanding the Problems (DUP) to improve the LLMs' math problem-solving ability by addressing semantic misunderstanding errors.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-04-23T12:16:05Z) - Large Language Models Struggle with Unreasonability in Math Problems [41.970853209666224]
Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown remarkable success on a wide range of math and reasoning benchmarks.<n>We observe that they often struggle when faced with unreasonable math problems.<n>We propose the textbfUnreasonable Math Problems (UMP) benchmark, designed to evaluate LLMs' ability to detect and respond to unreasonable math problem statements.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-03-28T12:04:28Z) - 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) - SelfCheck: Using LLMs to Zero-Shot Check Their Own Step-by-Step
Reasoning [55.76083560152823]
SelfCheck is a general-purpose zero-shot verification schema for recognizing errors in step-by-step reasoning.
We test SelfCheck on three datasets (GSM8K, MathQA, and MATH) and find that it successfully recognizes errors and, in turn, increases final answer accuracies.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-08-01T10:31:36Z) - 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.