Pith. sign in

REVIEW 7 cited by

MathBench: Evaluating the Theory and Application Proficiency of LLMs with a Hierarchical Mathematics Benchmark

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

arxiv 2405.12209 v1 pith:ZG7HCOSI submitted 2024-05-20 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords mathbenchllmsmathematicalbenchmarkmathematicsmodelsapplicationcapabilities
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) have showcased significant improvements in mathematics. However, traditional math benchmarks like GSM8k offer a unidimensional perspective, falling short in providing a holistic assessment of the LLMs' math capabilities. To address this gap, we introduce MathBench, a new benchmark that rigorously assesses the mathematical capabilities of large language models. MathBench spans a wide range of mathematical disciplines, offering a detailed evaluation of both theoretical understanding and practical problem-solving skills. The benchmark progresses through five distinct stages, from basic arithmetic to college mathematics, and is structured to evaluate models at various depths of knowledge. Each stage includes theoretical questions and application problems, allowing us to measure a model's mathematical proficiency and its ability to apply concepts in practical scenarios. MathBench aims to enhance the evaluation of LLMs' mathematical abilities, providing a nuanced view of their knowledge understanding levels and problem solving skills in a bilingual context. The project is released at https://github.com/open-compass/MathBench .

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 7 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. StatEval: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Large Language Models in Statistics

    cs.CL 2025-10 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    StatEval is a new 16,000-question statistics benchmark showing that even strong LLMs score below 60% on research-level statistical proof tasks.

  2. Potemkin Understanding in Large Language Models

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    LLMs frequently pass definition questions yet fail to use the same concepts in classification, generation, and editing tasks, a gap the authors call potemkin understanding.

  3. TReB: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Evaluating Table Reasoning Capabilities of Large Language Models

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    TReB evaluates 26 large language models on 26 table reasoning subtasks using textual, programmatic, and interleaved reasoning modes, finding that the best model reaches only about 70 on a 0-100 judging scale.

  4. SciDA: Scientific Dynamic Assessor of LLMs

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    SciDA is a dynamically initialized, multi-discipline olympiad benchmark that shows LLMs perform substantially worse when problem variables are randomized, which the authors attribute to memorization of fixed numerical...

  5. The Avengers: A Simple Recipe for Uniting Smaller Language Models to Challenge Proprietary Giants

    cs.CL 2025-05 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

    Clustering-based routing plus self-consistency voting among ten 7B open models reportedly outranks GPT-4.1 and GPT-4.5 on average over 15 diverse benchmarks.

  6. Towards Concise and Adaptive Thinking in Large Reasoning Models: A Survey

    cs.AI 2025-07 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

    A comprehensive review that categorizes methods for shortening and adaptively triggering chain-of-thought reasoning in large language models.

  7. Evaluation of LLMs for mathematical problem solving

    cs.AI 2025-05 reject novelty 3.0 of 10

    A three-model, three-dataset LLM math evaluation using a multi-dimensional reasoning rubric, undermined by contradictory accuracy tables.

Pith tools