REVIEW 2 cited by
Mathematical Language Models: A Survey
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
In recent years, there has been remarkable progress in leveraging Language Models (LMs), encompassing Pre-trained Language Models (PLMs) and Large-scale Language Models (LLMs), within the domain of mathematics. This paper conducts a comprehensive survey of mathematical LMs, systematically categorizing pivotal research endeavors from two distinct perspectives: tasks and methodologies. The landscape reveals a large number of proposed mathematical LLMs, which are further delineated into instruction learning, tool-based methods, fundamental CoT techniques, advanced CoT methodologies and multi-modal methods. To comprehend the benefits of mathematical LMs more thoroughly, we carry out an in-depth contrast of their characteristics and performance. In addition, our survey entails the compilation of over 60 mathematical datasets, including training datasets, benchmark datasets, and augmented datasets. Addressing the primary challenges and delineating future trajectories within the field of mathematical LMs, this survey is poised to facilitate and inspire future innovation among researchers invested in advancing this domain.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Exploring the Limit of Outcome Reward for Learning Mathematical Reasoning
OREAL shows that outcome-reward RL with best-of-N positive behavior cloning, negative reward shaping, and token-level reweighting reaches state-of-the-art MATH-500 accuracy at 7B and 32B scale.
-
Evaluation of LLMs for mathematical problem solving
A three-model, three-dataset LLM math evaluation using a multi-dimensional reasoning rubric, undermined by contradictory accuracy tables.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.