Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

LEMMA: Learning from Errors for MatheMatical Advancement in LLMs

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 2503.17439 v2 pith:PAJTHAK4 submitted 2025-03-21 cs.LG cs.AI

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

Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable reasoning capability in solving mathematical problems. However, existing approaches primarily focus on improving the quality of correct training data, e.g., distilling high-quality correct solutions from advanced models, neglecting the value contained in error data, potentially hindering the model's reflective ability. Though some studies attempt to leverage error data, they often involve complex mechanisms, such as Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) to explore error nodes. In this work, we propose to enhance LLMs' reasoning ability by Learning from Errors for Mathematical Advancement (LEMMA). LEMMA constructs data consisting of an incorrect solution with an erroneous step and a reflection connection to a correct solution for fine-tuning. Specifically, we systematically analyze the model-generated error types and introduce an error-type grounded mistake augmentation method to collect diverse and representative errors. Correct solutions are either from fixing the errors or generating a fresh start. Through a model-aware smooth reflection connection, the erroneous solution is transferred to the correct one. By fine-tuning on the constructed dataset, the model is able to self-correct errors autonomously within the generation process without relying on external critique models. Experimental results demonstrate that LEMMA achieves significant performance improvements over other strong baselines.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

  1. Can One Domain Help Others? A Data-Centric Study on Multi-Domain Reasoning via Reinforcement Learning

    cs.AI 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Training a Qwen2.5-7B model with GRPO on math and puzzle data improves both domains, code transfer depends on the starting model, and template or reward mismatches sharply hurt performance.

  2. Reflect, Retry, Reward: Self-Improving LLMs via Reinforcement Learning

    cs.CL 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A GRPO-based method that rewards only self-reflection tokens, not answer tokens, improves LLM accuracy on function calling and Countdown math tasks using only binary success/failure feedback.

  3. REST: Stress Testing Large Reasoning Models by Asking Multiple Problems at Once

    cs.CL 2025-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Asking a reasoning model several problems at once reveals large accuracy drops and exposes differences that single-question benchmarks miss.

  4. 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