While Large Language Models May Be Good Mathematical Problem Solvers, Are They Good Examiners?

Anonymous

Abstract: Recently, large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated breakthrough mathematical problem-solving capabilities in grade school math word problems (MWP). For example, on the MWP benchmark GSM8K, the accuracy of GPT-3.5-Turbo and MetaMath-70B reaches 80.80% and 82.30%, respectively. One question arises, does it mean that LLMs have truly mastered related mathematical problem-solving abilities, such as the ability to evaluate the mathematical reasoning process of MWP? In this paper, by presenting two types of benchmarks, where MCGSM8K aims at selecting one correct solution from four solutions, while GSM8K-Judgement judges whether a solution to a given question is true or false, we show that the ability of most LLMs to evaluate the mathematical reasoning process of MWP is far from sufficient. To compensate for this issue, we propose hybrid supervised fine-tuning data from the training data of GSM8K, MCGSM8K, and GSM8K-Judegment, which significantly improves performance on the proposed reasoning process evaluation benchmarks. For example, fine-tuning improves the performance of LLaMA-2-13B from 33.51% to 70.89% on MCGSM8K. In conclusion, we experimentally demonstrate that most LLMs have limited ability to evaluate the mathematical reasoning process of MWP, which can be enhanced through fine-tuning.

Paper Type: long

Research Area: Resources and Evaluation

Contribution Types: Model analysis & interpretability, Data resources

Languages Studied: English