95.5HOJun 4
Benchmarks in LeipzigAndrei Balakin, Miklós Bóna, Marie-Charlotte Brandenburg et al.
Between April 1 and May 15, 2026, a group of 49 mathematicians compiled a dataset of research-level mathematics questions with known answers. Most of the work was done during the 3-day workshop *Benchmarks in Leipzig* with 35 participants at the Max Planck Institute for Mathematics in the Sciences in Leipzig, Germany. We present the resulting collection of 100 questions. We evaluated these questions in three stages: a single attempt by five state-of-the-art LLMs, followed by a 20-runs-per-model evaluation with three of these models, and finally a 3-run attempt with two heavy-thinking models. After Stage 1, 41 questions remained completely unsolved; after Stage 2, this count dropped to 16; and we concluded Stage 3 with only 2 unsolved questions. This demonstrates that the mathematical reasoning capabilities of LLMs are becoming impressive.
COJan 15, 2012
Factorization of banded permutationsGreta Panova
We consider the factorization of permutations into bandwidth 1 permutations, which are products of mutually nonadjacent simple transpositions. We exhibit an upper bound on the minimal number of such factors and thus prove a conjecture of Gilbert Strang: a banded permutation of bandwidth $w$ can be represented as the product of at most $2w-1$ permutations of bandwidth 1. An analogous result holds also for infinite and cyclically banded permutations.
99.3CLMay 9
Soohak: A Mathematician-Curated Benchmark for Evaluating Research-level Math Capabilities of LLMsGuijin Son, Seungone Kim, Catherine Arnett et al.
Following the recent achievement of gold-medal performance on the IMO by frontier LLMs, the community is searching for the next meaningful and challenging target for measuring LLM reasoning. Whereas olympiad-style problems measure step-by-step reasoning alone, research-level problems use such reasoning to advance the frontier of mathematical knowledge itself, emerging as a compelling alternative. Yet research-level math benchmarks remain scarce because such problems are difficult to source (e.g., Riemann Bench and FrontierMath-Tier 4 contain 25 and 50 problems, respectively). To support reliable evaluation of next-generation frontier models, we introduce Soohak, a 439-problem benchmark newly authored from scratch by 64 mathematicians. Soohak comprises two subsets. On the Challenge subset, frontier models including Gemini-3-Pro, GPT-5, and Claude-Opus-4.5 reach 30.4%, 26.4%, and 10.4% respectively, leaving substantial headroom, while leading open-weight models such as Qwen3-235B, GPT-OSS-120B, and Kimi-2.5 remain below 15%. Notably, beyond standard problem solving, Soohak introduces a refusal subset that probes a capability intrinsic to research mathematics: recognizing ill-posed problems and pausing rather than producing confident but unjustified answers. On this subset, no model exceeds 50%, identifying refusal as a new optimization target that current models do not directly address. To prevent contamination, the dataset will be publicly released in late 2026, with model evaluations available upon request in the interim.
49.1COMay 4
Trees and Graphs with Non Log-concave Dominating Set Sequence via AI ToolsAlina Du, Steven Heilman, Greta Panova
We give new examples of graphs and trees with dominating set sequences that are not log-concave. These examples were generated by PatternBoost, a transformer-based reinforcement learning software developed by Charton-Ellenberg-Wagner-Williamson. We also show: for any positive integer $m$, there exists a tree whose dominating set sequence is not log-concave for at least $m$ indices by modifying a similar construction of Bautista-Ramos for the independent set sequence. We show that a large class of caterpillar graphs has log-concave dominating set sequences. A continuous analogue of the sequence is also log-concave for all graphs.