Exposing the Achilles' Heel: Evaluating LLMs Ability to Handle Mistakes in Mathematical Reasoning
This addresses the gap in evaluating reasoning capabilities for LLMs in educational and real-world applications, though it is incremental as it focuses on benchmarking rather than a new method.
The paper tackled the problem of evaluating LLMs' ability to detect and correct reasoning mistakes in math word problems, revealing GPT-4o's superior performance and highlighting challenges like data contamination in smaller models.
Large Language Models (LLMs) have been applied to Math Word Problems (MWPs) with transformative impacts, revolutionizing how these complex problems are approached and solved in various domains including educational settings. However, the evaluation of these models often prioritizes final accuracy, overlooking the crucial aspect of reasoning capabilities. This work addresses this gap by focusing on the ability of LLMs to detect and correct reasoning mistakes. We introduce a novel dataset MWP-MISTAKE, incorporating MWPs with both correct and incorrect reasoning steps generated through rule-based methods and smaller language models. Our comprehensive benchmarking reveals significant insights into the strengths and weaknesses of state-of-the-art models, such as GPT-4o, GPT-4, GPT-3.5Turbo, and others. We highlight GPT-$o's superior performance in mistake detection and rectification and the persistent challenges faced by smaller models. Additionally, we identify issues related to data contamination and memorization, impacting the reliability of LLMs in real-world applications. Our findings emphasize the importance of rigorous evaluation of reasoning processes and propose future directions to enhance the generalization and robustness of LLMs in mathematical problem-solving.