Zihao Li

Boyan Xu, Liang Wen, Zihao Li et al.

Recent advancements in Large Language Models (LLMs) have sparked interest in their potential applications across various fields. This paper embarked on a pivotal inquiry: Can existing LLMs effectively serve as "water expert models" for water engineering and research tasks? This study was the first to evaluate LLMs' contributions across various water engineering and research tasks by establishing a domain-specific benchmark suite, namely, WaterER. Herein, we prepared 983 tasks related to water engineering and research, categorized into "wastewater treatment", "environmental restoration", "drinking water treatment and distribution", "sanitation", "anaerobic digestion" and "contaminants assessment". We evaluated the performance of seven LLMs (i.e., GPT-4, GPT-3.5, Gemini, GLM-4, ERNIE, QWEN and Llama3) on these tasks. We highlighted the strengths of GPT-4 in handling diverse and complex tasks of water engineering and water research, the specialized capabilities of Gemini in academic contexts, Llama3's strongest capacity to answer Chinese water engineering questions and the competitive performance of Chinese-oriented models like GLM-4, ERNIE and QWEN in some water engineering tasks. More specifically, current LLMs excelled particularly in generating precise research gaps for papers on "contaminants and related water quality monitoring and assessment". Additionally, they were more adept at creating appropriate titles for research papers on "treatment processes for wastewaters", "environmental restoration", and "drinking water treatment". Overall, this study pioneered evaluating LLMs in water engineering and research by introducing the WaterER benchmark to assess the trustworthiness of their predictions. This standardized evaluation framework would also drive future advancements in LLM technology by using targeting datasets, propelling these models towards becoming true "water expert".

Kaixuan Huang, Jiacheng Guo, Zihao Li et al.

Large language models have demonstrated impressive performance on challenging mathematical reasoning tasks, which has triggered the discussion of whether the performance is achieved by true reasoning capability or memorization. To investigate this question, prior work has constructed mathematical benchmarks when questions undergo simple perturbations -- modifications that still preserve the underlying reasoning patterns of the solutions. However, no work has explored hard perturbations, which fundamentally change the nature of the problem so that the original solution steps do not apply. To bridge the gap, we construct MATH-P-Simple and MATH-P-Hard via simple perturbation and hard perturbation, respectively. Each consists of 279 perturbed math problems derived from level-5 (hardest) problems in the MATH dataset (Hendrycksmath et. al., 2021). We observe significant performance drops on MATH-P-Hard across various models, including o1-mini (-16.49%) and gemini-2.0-flash-thinking (-12.9%). We also raise concerns about a novel form of memorization where models blindly apply learned problem-solving skills without assessing their applicability to modified contexts. This issue is amplified when using original problems for in-context learning. We call for research efforts to address this challenge, which is critical for developing more robust and reliable reasoning models.