EngTrace: A Symbolic Benchmark for Verifiable Process Supervision of Engineering Reasoning
read the original abstract
Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly entering specialized, safety-critical engineering workflows governed by strict quantitative standards and immutable physical laws, making rigorous evaluation of their reasoning capabilities imperative. However, existing benchmarks such as MMLU, MATH, and HumanEval assess isolated cognitive skills, failing to capture the physically grounded reasoning central to engineering, where scientific principles, quantitative modeling, and practical constraints must converge. To enable verifiable process supervision in engineering, we introduce EngTrace, a symbolic benchmark built on 90 parameterized templates, each generating unique, contamination-resistant problem instances, spanning three major engineering branches, nine core domains, and 20 distinct areas, yielding 1,350 test cases that stress-test generalization across diverse physical scenarios. Moving beyond outcome matching, we introduce a verifiable two-stage evaluation framework that uses a tiered protocol to validate intermediate reasoning traces alongside final answers through automated procedural checks and a heterogeneous AI Tribunal. Our evaluation of 27 leading LLMs reveals a distinct trade-off between numeric precision and trace fidelity, identifying a complexity cliff where abstract mathematical pre-training fails to translate into the integrative reasoning required for advanced engineering tasks.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
LPDS: Evaluating LLM Robustness Through Logic-Preserving Difficulty Scaling
LPDS quantifies difficulty of logic-preserving problem variations and searches for the hardest ones, producing up to 5x larger performance drops than random sampling and better robustness gains from fine-tuning on dif...
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.