Brains vs. Bytes: Evaluating LLM Proficiency in Olympiad Mathematics
원문 초록
Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) have shown impressive progress in mathematical reasoning tasks. However, current evaluation benchmarks predominantly focus on the accuracy of final answers, often overlooking the logical rigor crucial for mathematical problem-solving. The claim that state-of-the-art LLMs can solve Math Olympiad-level problems requires closer examination. To explore this, we conducted both qualitative and quantitative human evaluations of proofs generated by LLMs, and developed a schema for automatically assessing their reasoning capabilities. Our study reveals that current LLMs fall significantly short of solving challenging Olympiad-level problems and frequently fail to distinguish correct mathematical reasoning from clearly flawed solutions. We also found that occasional correct final answers provided by LLMs often result from pattern recognition or heuristic shortcuts rather than genuine mathematical reasoning. These findings underscore the substantial gap between LLM performance and human expertise in advanced mathematical reasoning and highlight the importance of developing benchmarks that prioritize the rigor and coherence of mathematical arguments rather than merely the correctness of final answers.
함께 살펴볼 논문
공통 태그를 근거로 연결했습니다. 실제 인용 관계나 논문의 우수성을 뜻하지 않습니다.
Decomposing Elements of Problem Solving: What "Math" Does RL Teach?
Error Typing for Smarter Rewards: Improving Process Reward Models with Error-Aware Hierarchical Supervision
RaDeR: Reasoning-aware Dense Retrieval Models
Towards Spoken Mathematical Reasoning: Benchmarking Speech-based Models over Multi-faceted Math Problems
Reasoning or Memorization? Unreliable Results of Reinforcement Learning Due to Data Contamination
A Practical Two-Stage Recipe for Mathematical LLMs: Maximizing Accuracy with SFT and Efficiency with Reinforcement Learning
토론
이 논문과 연결된 포럼 글이 아직 없습니다.