REVIEW 3 cited by
Benchmarking LLMs' Mathematical Reasoning with Unseen Random Variables Questions
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
Recent studies have raised significant concerns regarding the reliability of current mathematics benchmarks, highlighting issues such as simplistic design and potential data contamination. Consequently, developing a reliable benchmark that effectively evaluates large language models' (LLMs) genuine capabilities in mathematical reasoning remains a critical challenge. To address these concerns, we propose RV-Bench, a novel evaluation methodology for Benchmarking LLMs with Random Variables in mathematical reasoning. Specifically, we build question-generating functions to produce random variable questions (RVQs), whose background content mirrors original benchmark problems, but with randomized variable combinations, rendering them "unseen" to LLMs. Models must completely understand the inherent question pattern to correctly answer RVQs with diverse variable combinations. Thus, an LLM's genuine reasoning capability is reflected through its accuracy and robustness on RV-Bench. We conducted extensive experiments on over 30 representative LLMs across more than 1,000 RVQs. Our findings propose that LLMs exhibit a proficiency imbalance between encountered and ``unseen'' data distributions. Furthermore, RV-Bench reveals that proficiency generalization across similar mathematical reasoning tasks is limited, but we verified it can still be effectively elicited through test-time scaling.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
On Path to Multimodal Historical Reasoning: HistBench and HistAgent
HistAgent, a history-specialized agent, scores 27.54% pass@1 and 36.47% pass@2 on the new 414-question HistBench benchmark, surpassing generalist agents tested on the same data.
-
Credit Cards, Confusion, Computation, and Consequences: What Can We Uncover About Language Model Reasoning?
CreditCardQA shows LLMs err mainly on credit-card contractual conditions and comparisons, not arithmetic, with Program-of-Thought narrowing open–closed model gaps.
-
MathReal: We Keep It Real! A Real Scene Benchmark for Evaluating Math Reasoning in Multimodal Large Language Models
A new benchmark of 2,000 K-12 math questions photographed in real scenes finds that multimodal LLMs perform significantly worse on authentic handheld images than on clean benchmarks.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.